State Bank of India v Sood [1997]

Facts

  • The defendants mortgaged their property to secure both present and future business debts as they should arise
  • The defendants (Sood) defaulted on their mortgage payments
  • The bank (mortgagee) sought repossession

Issue

  • Were other claimants’ equitable (family) interests in the property overreached, despite the fact that money had not been paid under the conveyance of repossession?

Decision

  • Yes

Reasoning

  • Overreaching will take place irrespective of the payment of capital monies under a conveyance
RELATED CASE  Harris v Flower (1904)

Posted in Land Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 3rd February 2015

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy