CORAM
COKER JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
LEWIS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SOWEMIMO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
S. O. N. OKAFOR & SONS LTD APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The plaintiff borrowed some money from the 1st defendant which was to be repaid after a period and an indenture was entered into by the parties.
HELD
The Court held that the appeal accordingly fails and is dismissed
ISSUES
Whether or not the 1st Defendants had right of sale under the indenture (Exhibit “E”) as the 1st Defendants had not advance to the Plaintiffs £11,330 and had only in fact advanced £11,000 and were therefore in default of their liability.
Whether the full sum of £ 11,300 had in fact been paid by virtue of the set off.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
RIGHTS OF A MORTGAGEE
“It is really admitted that if there is no power to proceed to a sale in respect of the instalments due and unpaid, and if the right of the mortgagee are postponed until such time as the total mortgage debt has become due, the mortgagee has no power to exercise any of the rights of a mortgagee in the interval.” I. LEWIS, JSC.
RIGHTS OF A MORTGAGEE
“It is really admitted that if there is no power to proceed to a sale in respect of the instalments due and unpaid, and if the right of the mortgagee are postponed until such time as the total mortgage debt has become due, the mortgagee has no power to exercise any of the rights of a mortgagee in the interval.” I. LEWIS, JSC.<foo< p=””></foo<>
CASES CITED
Payne v. Cardiff Rural Council (1932) 1 KB 241
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Conveyancing Act, 1881
Law of Property Act, 1995