Allowed

Gautam Chand Chopra v. E.Velmurugan and another

Madras HC22 Dec 2022A/4419/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted leave to the proposed plaintiff to institute a suit against the defendant for enforcement of a personal covenant in a simple mortgage and for sale of the mortgaged asset, holding it was not a suit for land. Jurisdictional objections were noted but not decided.

What did the court decide?

Leave to sue the defendants before this Court for enforcement of personal covenant and sale of mortgaged asset.

Gautam Chand Chopra Vs E.Velmurugan and… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

A.No.4419 of 2022

¶2

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J

¶3

The proposed plaintiff has presented this application seeking

¶4

leave to institute the suit against the defendant before this Court.

¶5

A simple mortgage was executed by the 1^st defendant in

¶6

favour of the plaintiff. The suit is for enforcement of the personal covenant to pay amounts secured by the mortgage and, in default thereof, for sale of the mortgaged asset. Learned counsel for the applicant asserts that this is not a suit for land. On the basis that the title deeds were deposited with the plaintiff at Chennai and part payments were made at Chennai, this application is filed.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits, on instructions,

¶8

that possession of the property would not be claimed in this suit by seeking amendment of the plaint. This statement is recorded.

¶9

Page No.1/4

¶10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶11

Learned counsel for the proposed defendants opposes this application on the ground that the 1^st defendant resides at Villupuram and that the mortgaged property is at Villupuram. He further submits that the simple mortgage deed was executed and registered at Villupuram. He contends that no part of the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Court.

¶12

Upon examining the draft plaint, it is clear that it is a suit to enforce the personal covenant in a simple mortgage and for sale of the mortgaged asset for purposes of recovery of the amount secured thereunder. Therefore, it is not a suit for land.

¶13

As regards the cause of action, the plaintiff has stated in the

¶14

draft plaint that title deeds relating to the property were deposited with the plaintiff at Chennai and that part payments were made at Chennai. These assertions are denied by the defendant. Since these are disputed questions of fact, a decision thereon should await trial. However, on the basis of these averments and taking into account the fact that this is not a

¶15

Page No.2/4

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

suit for land, leave to sue is granted to the applicant to sue the defendants before this Court. This order will not preclude the defendants from raising the issue of jurisdiction and making a request for an issue to be framed on this question when the suit is taken up for hearing. . As a corollary, the Registry is directed to number the suit, if otherwise in order.

22.12.2022

kal

Page No.3/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J

¶23

kal

¶24

A.No.4418 of 2022

¶25

22.12.2022

¶26

Page No.4/4

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Gautam Chand Chopra v. E.Velmurugan and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gautam Chand Chopra v. E.Velmurugan and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chitra Saraswathi Vs Nil

S.Syed Ali Fathima and 3 Others Vs No Respondent

Mr.S.J.Karthikeyan Vs S.J Kumaresh and Another

Annadata Kumar Chakravarthy and Another Vs Vankamamidi Nagamani

J.Devi Padma Vs S.Santhakumar

Gautam Chand Chopra Vs E.Rajarajan (Deceased) Mr.R.Arun