Mortgagor’s Right of Redemption [Section 60]At any time after the principal money has become due, the mortgagor has a right,
on payment or
tender, at a proper time and place, of the mortgage-money, to require the
- to deliver to the mortgagor the mortgage-deed and all documents relating
to the mortgaged
property which are in the possession or power of the mortgagee,
- where the mortgagee is in possession of the mortgaged property, to
deliver possession thereof to
the mortgagor, and
- at the cost of the mortgagor either to re-transfer the mortgaged
property to him or to such third
person as he may direct, or to execute and (where the mortgage has been effected
by a registered
instrument) to have registered an acknowledgement in writing that any right in
derogation of his
interest transferred to the mortgagee has been extinguished:
Provided that the right conferred by this section has not been extinguished by
act of the parties or by
decree of a Court.
The right conferred by this section is called a right to redeem and a suit to
enforce it is called a suit
Nothing in this section shall be deemed to render invalid any provision to the effect that, if the time
fixed for payment of the principal money has been allowed to pass or no such time has been fixed,
the mortgagee shall be entitled to reasonable notice before payment or tender of such money.1
Redemption of the portion of mortgaged property in this section does not entitle a person interested
in a share only of the mortgaged property to redeem his desired share only, on payment of a
proportionate amount for the part and the amount due on the mortgage. Exception is only there
where a mortgagee or if there are more mortgagees has acquired in whole or in part of the share of
Section 60 has three different provisions described in it 2:
- Right of Redemption.
- Clog on Redemption.
- Once a mortgage, always a mortgagee
The section deals with the mortgage when the principal amount remains due. The
according to the form of mortgage.
There are three kinds of primary kind of redemption:
- Delivery of the possession back to the mortgagor
- Delivery of the title documents and the mortgage deed.
- Returning the property in favor of the mortgagor. 3
Essential requirements of Right of Redemption
- Redemption before time period- Here the essential element is that the
mentioned in the mortgage deed is to be followed. Only after getting a decree
from the court
or with the consent of the both the parties the time duration of deed could be
the party can redeem the mortgage before the time mentioned in the deed. The
cannot avoid it. It was held in Bakhatawar Begum vs HussainiKhanam4, many
raised regarding the redemption of the deed before time period mentioned in the
court here held that it can be done through court decree and same view was
accepted in Pranil
Kumar vs KishoriLal 5, the court further held that the property could be redeemed
time period mentioned if the contract does not state anything contrary towards
- Validity of the deed- It is quintessential and primary requirement of
the mortgage deed to be
legally valid and can be held up in the court of law. It was held in Vishnu kaya
vs Vishnu Maya 6
that the deed should be registered fulfilling all the criteria of the
registration. It was further
held that only after the deed is registered the mortgage can redeem the property
the dues or take the mortgagee to the court.
- Payment of money due- It was first held in VardaraJulu vs Dhanlaxmi7
in India that payment of the dues is essential for the redemption of the
property given to the mortgagee.
- Filing of the suit- Filing of suit is considered to be the primary duty
of the mortgagor before
redemption of the property. The right of redemption of the property can only be
after a suit is filed in the suit.
Rights and Duties of the Mortgagor
The right and duties of the mortgagor are mentioned as follows
- The mortgagor has the right to redeem the property after the payment of
- The mortgagor has the true ownership over the property and only he can
pass the title.
- Once an owner is always an owner.
- The mortgagor has the right to receive the property in the state it was
given or in the form as
specified in the contract.
- The mortgagor has the right to redeem the property prior to the time
mentioned in the deed
by getting a decree of the court.
- The mortgagor also has the right to extend or renew the lease.
- The mortgagor has duty to not waste the property.
- He has the duty to indemnify for the defective title.
- He also has the duty to compensate the mortgagee for any loss caused to
- He also the duty to direct rent of a lease of mortgagee.
Exception of Right of Redemption:
- The right of redemption can't be done in a mortgage deed of the
understanding yet after it
tends to be done by the accommodation of the right of redemption or by deal or
strategy by the free exchange.
- The right can be exercised by the decree of the court.
- The mortgagor just has the option to get such declaration regarding the
right of redemption
can be anticipated until practicing after the decree for forfeiture of the right
can be passed by the court.
- On the off chance that the right of redemption and interest of mortgage
vested in one
individual then the right is done.
- In the event that the property is vested in-state or if the property
secured by the decree of the
Once a mortgage always a mortgage
The above-mentioned statement state that once a mortgage deed is always a mortgage deed and it
cannot be changed. It will always remain a mortgage deed and revision or change can be done but it
should not affect the right of redemption. It was held in the case of Knocks v. Roulds 9, that the right of
redemption on a mortgage can't be filled by any action that makes it non-redeemable. If any changes
made at that point it will invalid and void. In the event that any condition is forced by the party, at
that point it will likewise be void. The court stated that the deed to make a mortgage and such a
contract would remain a mortgage contract. In any case, the constraint of the right of redemption
after mortgage by a contract won't be considered as resistance.
It is to make reference here that the transactional state of converting mortgage into sale deed is likewise
white for the explanation of opposition on the right of redemption. A condition that in case of non-
payment of any installment of mortgage money the mortgagee will hold the mortgaged property as a
lease, in the mortgage deed the following is considered to be illicit and ineffective. At all the goal is
that contract and the right of redemption of mortgage are co-broad whether the redemption has been
noticed or not.
On account of Vishnu Kaya versus Vishnu Maya10, it has been held by the Sikkim High Court that in the
event that any transaction is a transaction of mortgage, at that point based on the value the right of
redemption will consistently be vested on it. It is likewise the prerequisite of the guideline of common
equity and the principle of natural justice.
The mortgage and the right of redemption exist together and whenever there is a
mortgage, right of redemption comes along with it. The same goes hand in hand:
- It cannot be transferred through any other transaction.
- The right of redemption can neither be ended nor limited, it will remain
in a mortgage deed.
Doctrine of Clog on Redemption
The phrase once a mortgagee is always a mortgagee, the following phrase means that the mortgagee
would always remain a mortgagee and never become an owner. He cannot transfer the property rights
to a third party as he does not have the authority to pass on the benefits of the property. The phrase
is a part of equity of fairness.11 To ensure no exploitation takes place the courts developed this phrase.
Accordingly, a mortgage deed establishes two things, one being the right of the creditor which is
limited up to his interest and other being deducting the residuary interest of the creditor from it. In a
mortgage deed the right of redemption is always there and cannot be written off unless the debtor
fails to pay the amount or he wishes to do so. The right is equitable to right to redeem.12
The premise of this doctrine lies in the practice of value, equity, and a good conscience and is
applicable to areas where acts are not applicable. On reasonable scrutiny of the functions of a
mortgage, it is seen in the majority of the cases that the mortgagor goes into such an agreement as a
result of some monetary difficulty. The law perceives the power of the predominant party to embed
provisos that will serve his own advantages by making obstacles on the right of redemption13 and the
same philosophy was also taken into consideration in U. Nilan v. Kannayyan (Dead) Through Lrs
The right of redemption of the mortgagor is the inherent right provided in the mortgage deed. On
looking at the various aspects of the mortgage deed, the right of redemption forms a primary part of
the mortgage deed. Furthermore, the right of redemption is applicable only after the mortgagor has
performed the rights and duties assigned to them.
A mortgage deed cannot be altered and made a sale deed, neither the mortgagee becomes the owner
of the property as the same is against basic principle of the mortgage deed. Thus, the right of
redemption of a mortgagor is secured by the court and provides them protection against exploitation
caused to them. Furthermore Section 60 of TPA aims to secure the interest of the mortgagor and also
it provides the essentials of the mortgage deed and the movement of the property.
- The Transfer of Property Act, § 60, 1882.
- J. K. (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. v. New Kaiser-I-Hind Spginning and Weaving Co.
Ltd. and Juggilal Kamlapat Bankers and Ors. (Creditors),  2 SCR 866.
- Rashbehary Ghose, Law of Mortgage, (first published in 1875, Kamal Law
- Bakhatawar Begum vs HussainiKhanam  BOMLR 16  344.
- Pranil Kumar vs KishoriLal  Kolkata 1  A.I.R 2003.
- Vishnu kaya vs Vishnu Maya  Sikkim 1  AIR 1980.
- VardaraJulu vs Dhanlaxmi  MIT 365.
- Mirzawardahbeg ‘Right and Liabilities of the Mortgagor’ (iPleaders, June
27, 2019) accessed April 17 April, 2020.
- Knocks v. Rould  Sc 24, .
- Vishnu Kaya v. Vishnu Maya  Sikkim 1  AIR 1980.
- Poonam Pradhan Saxena, Property Law (first published 2006, LexisNexis
Butterworths 2011) 344.
- Ambalal Jasraj v. Ambalal Badarwal, (1955) Raj 321(1955) AIR 1957.
- Bhullan v. Bachcha, (1931) All 380 (1931) AIR 1931.
- U. Nilan vs Kannayyan (Dead) Through Lrs (1999).