Gangadhar v Shankar Lal

Facts

A single mortgage was created over property, and a question arose as to whether the mortgagor (or a person claiming part of the mortgaged property) could redeem only a portion of the security rather than the whole. The dispute turned on the integrity of the mortgage and the proviso to S60. The court considered the unity and indivisibility of the right of redemption.

Issues

• Whether a mortgagor may redeem only a part of the mortgaged property
• What is the scope of the integrity-of-the-mortgage rule and its statutory exceptions under S60

Arguments

The party seeking partial redemption argued he should be allowed to redeem his share on proportionate payment. The opposing party relied on the indivisibility of the mortgage requiring redemption of the entire security.

Held

The Supreme Court held that the right of redemption is one and indivisible: the integrity of a mortgage cannot be broken by the mortgagor, who must redeem the whole or none, unless the mortgagee has acquired a share of the mortgagor's interest or one of the statutory exceptions to the proviso to S60 applies. The rule protects the mortgagee from being compelled to hold a fragmented security. Partial redemption was therefore not permitted on the facts outside the recognised exceptions.

Ratio decidendi

By reason of the integrity of the mortgage, redemption must be of the entire mortgaged property; partial redemption is allowed only within the statutory exceptions to the proviso to S60.

Significance

Authoritative Supreme Court statement of the integrity-of-the-mortgage / indivisibility-of-redemption principle under S60, a cornerstone rule in mortgage redemption suits.

Related