Section 722 if the property has been mortgaged. After registering a mortgage is registered servitude or other real rights. The mortgagee did not agree with the gem. That right there is a bigger mortgage, servitude or other real rights are. If the prejudice to the rights of the mortgagee when the mortgage is to be deleted. Rights, said after the loss of registration.
Section 723 if the mortgaged property damage. If the property is mortgaged, but something is lost or damage. That is why insurance is not enough to know that He said mortgage, the mortgagee shall pay in immediately. Except when the reason is because it is not the fault of the mortgage. The mortgage is a mortgage for another property to have enough to offer. Repair the damage within a reasonable time.
Section 724 and any mortgage insurance to mortgage its assets to another party to pay the debt. And to repay the loan itself shall not be forced to parry a mortgage. If you prefer that the mortgage is to get money from the debtor for the amount they have paid.
If that is the mortgage. That the mortgage you would like to receive a refund of the amount receivable by the mortgagee. Will be forced to repay the debt of the mortgage.
Section 725 on two people or more were on their mortgage assets to guarantee debt, but One only has to pay the other party and does not specify the order of the gem. He said the mortgage is a loan. A property owner must apply for a mortgage, the mortgagor is entitled to recourse to the other can not.
Section 726 on several persons were on their mortgage assets to guarantee debt, but the only one. The others are to be paid and specify the order with a gem. You agree that the mortgagee to the mortgage debt that one. Would make the mortgage, the latter can escape with just his size, but they have been damaged.
Section 727 if one of their mortgage assets to guarantee debt of another person must be paid. To the provisions of Section 697, 700 and 701 are secured by the enforcement provisions as it should.
Supreme Court to 10532/2551.
The defendant is a land title deed No. 12,844 to No. 2 after the defendant had mortgaged to the registration of a servitude agreement to the plaintiff by the defendant at the second site without permission. The servitude is registered in the land must not make it worse. The rights of the defendant, a second mortgagee in the mortgaged land under Section 722 of the fact that when a court can not sell it by auction to 9 times, but not yet registered to servitude. plaintiff If the price of the mortgaged property registration was reduced to servitude, the prejudice to the right of the defendant at the time the second mortgage. The rights of the defendant's second mortgage was registered before it is larger than the servitude of the plaintiff accused the two do not have to deliver the said land to the land official in Saraburi, Nong registered to servitude to the plaintiff.
Supreme Court in 3232/2545.
Letter dated October 25, 2538, the second defendant as a guarantor of the plaintiff. To repay debt and redeem the outstanding debt under a mortgage is 250,000 baht, the second defendant to the plaintiff already checked the calculation of interest on the amount. Then inform the defendant of the two within a month to the second defendant to repay debt and redeem the mortgage. The plaintiff does not specify the need to calculate interest. The plaintiff notified the defendant that the second payment of U.S. $ 819,685.54 identified as outstanding as of July 28, 2536 on outstanding claims do not match each other. And the initial interest rate that does not appear to be starting any day. If the two do not match or the defendant intends to repay the debt to be correct. I like to argue to the plaintiff by requesting the repayment of debt is the total debt of Baht 250,000 contract, plus interest from the date of the loan overdraft with the defendant, one for the plaintiff's termination was November 9. 2, 2533, but the defendant can not therefore be considered whether the defendant has requested that the two obligations. And the plaintiff accepted the settlement because the two defendants released from liability under the guarantee, and mortgage contract under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 701 727 and 744 (3).
Supreme Court to 566/2536.
Describe the plaintiff sued the defendants for a loan to buy glass bottles and glass bottles are not from the plaintiff since 2515 several consecutive Tึgp.s. 2522 when it was thought that the defendant's account that one does not. sent are not returned the plaintiff the amount of 54,788 is the amount of 687,551 baht, the defendant first had to pay for a wooden crate for the plaintiff to 4, the remaining money to the defendant at first will be a wooden crate to the plaintiff 687,547 baht as follows: indictment, to understand it. Please do not be vague The story of a wooden crate that is the price and type of wood that had been the first one to return at any time. How much of the rest are details that must attest to the floor. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 649 is liable to pay compensation to Iืmใchgcgrop. But according to the complaint, the plaintiff sued to recover a crate or a wooden crate for the defendant to a borrower with a glass bottle products. The plaintiff sold to defendant a contract with the plaintiff and the defendant at a time since being traded to the provisions of section 649 comes into force can not. The age of 10 years under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 164, the second mortgage agreement specifies only that the defendant's mortgage and converting the land to the mortgagee as a security for trading. The company's products, glass bottles, even when I had the first defendant in the mortgage contract. 1 owe the plaintiff the value of products, glass bottles and the wooden crate. However, when not specified in the contract that the mortgage insurance. The payment of a wooden crate, and it is obvious that non-wood products, glass bottles are the only two defendants entered the mortgage insurance and credit of the defendant. And not only that a defendant has two or more positions with the defendants in a case like this should be the intent of the parties is suspected in a mortgage. Must be interpreted in a way that you are the defendant. 2, the party will be disadvantaged in debt, according to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 11 of the mortgage contract, the defendant, the three land as collateral for repayment of the defendant at first to buy the bottle from the plaintiff on the same day. The defendant entered into two mortgages, simply stated that the land as collateral for a mortgage in order. Buy a bottle of the defendant, as specified in the mortgage contract, the defendant made to land two of three defendants to insure mortgage loans, it is the same. The debt may not be distinguishable. The second defendant was not liable for the mortgage debt and mortgage debt, the third defendant was not liable by a third defendant will not appeal and petition. The Supreme Court agreed with the defendant's decision to No. 3 with the Code of Civil Procedure Section 245 (a) of Section 247.
Supreme Court in 9156/2538.
2 and 3, the defendant entered into an overdraft with a song with. Agreement by the debtor and the defendant plead guilty to the 2nd and 3rd. The land and building, the defendant No. 2 and No. 3. Ownership share. The debt is guaranteed under the overdraft with the defendant, 2 and 3. Krrmsittisrwm in property owned jointly mortgaged property is mortgaged. The demand for insurance payments under the overdraft of the defendant. 2 and 3, the defendant, 2 and 3 as part of the debtor class. The second layer is a debtor under the mortgage debt guarantees and equipment. Only by the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 724 does not grant the defendant. 2 and 3, which was initially due to take recourse to remove them. , A mortgage and even before. The agreement by the two defendants plead guilty with the debtor and the third one was. Meaning simply that the. They are liable with the defendant, 2 and 3, I mean big. It has become the primary debtor, as defendants 2 and 3, with no. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 693 granted the defendants 2 and 3, that is. Remove from recourse. This is not a guarantee. 2 and 3, and the defendant is not a creditor and a debtor to make a deduction. Eliminated due to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 341, when the screening. Opposition to the proceeds from the sale of land and buildings of the defendant. 2 and 3 in this case, the repayment of U.S. $ 9,429,863 to the claimant as a creditor. Insurance before other creditors who have no right to object to the amount of money. U.S. $ 3,143,287.66 with the money to get some of the netting. To gain from the sale, the auctioneer.
Supreme Court to 382/2537.
The current card is a customer of the defendant that the plaintiff does not appear in the current account of the evidence. After the end of the loan agreement overdraft defendant to a request from the account or the plaintiff give the defendant an overdraft to go even after the expiration of the loan overdraft defendant 1. 2 Although the current account is the account to pay off debts. Not so with the current account to no manner of walking. Widespread tax offset each other. Such circumstances, the plaintiff and defendant did not intend to renew an overdraft loan anymore. Recover the overdraft account, which would terminate the contract and the date. Due under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 856, the plaintiff is entitled to charge interest until the end of the agreement. The plaintiff still has the right to charge interest without compounding until the debt is paid. This is done to the plaintiff accused the three of guarantee, and mortgage land to secure the debt under the loan overdraft of the defendant at first made to the plaintiff in the amount of 400,000 baht, or up to 400,000 baht, showing that the defendant's third offer guarantees. and land to secure payment of obligations under loan agreements over Account of the fact that a budget of 400,000 baht, but it would appear that the plaintiff consented to the defendant a loan overdraft exceeding 400,000 baht, it is a commitment between the accused 1 and accused 2, managing partner of the defendant No. 1 to the plaintiff only The three defendants are bound by the contract, so at the end of the third defendant to pay the defendant's request that an amount of 400,000 baht to the plaintiff along with interest. It is the plaintiff's debt, which is payable on the debt due by it. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 701, first paragraph, when the plaintiff does not accept payment from the defendant that would make the three defendants. 3, which is releasing the guarantor from liability for payment of debts. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 701 727 of Section 744 (3).
Supreme Court in 3880/2535.
The defendant entered into an agreement to borrow from a bank overdraft T. The plaintiff land as collateral. The defendant did not repay the bank. Tho plaintiff paid the defendant. Plaintiffs shall have recourse to the defendant to reimburse the plaintiff for the amount paid to the Bank in accordance with Section 724, but the plaintiff did not exercise such recourse. I agree with the defendant made the same letter says. Since the defendant as a loan. The plaintiff presented the check as security for a loan. And agrees to repay the loan each month until the end. Such cases can be considered a debt incurred as well as documents that do. Change is the essence of the debt. It is a new debt. Result in the suspension of debt to the plaintiff sued the defendant was like to be in debt, according to the document.
Supreme Court in 5783/2533.
Barker lease dispute. On payment of lease due to transfer to the petitioner by the name of the debtor, the first in the land of the debtor, the first to land as collateral to raise money to trade with debtor a written confirmation delivered to customers. that ownership of the disputed claim of the petitioner. And to restore the petitioner to redeem the mortgage within a year, it said. The dispute is the property of a debtor who is the petitioner named in the deed as an owner instead. Although it took the dispute to a debtor does not redeem the mortgage. The petitioner as owner of the mortgaged property is entitled to redeem the mortgage itself. If you would like to call for redemption of mortgage loans to pay the redemption of a mortgage. When I redeem the mortgage, the mortgage would be forced to suspend the redemption of a mortgage loan that is not repeated.
Supreme Court in 4230/2528.
The mortgage sued to revoke the legal rent property The mortgage made by the tenant conspired with the knowledge that the mortgage contract. And agreement to the mortgage contract. Cause damage to the enforcement of the mortgagee that the mortgaged property, such cases may lead to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 722 of the cases used to be. It's not the right person to hire property or property rights of servitude, otherwise it must be taken to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 237 was adapted to the case.
Supreme Court in 1187/2517.
In the case of mortgaged property as security for the debts of the others. The enforcement of the Civil and Commercial Code. The mortgage. It does not contain provisions similar to Section 689 shall apply for a mortgage to secure the enforcement of the settlement. Does not assets of the debtor and the creditor will be required to remove from the property. Does not guarantee it.
Supreme Court in 2427/2518.
Although the plaintiff did not present the Limited Power of Attorney shall notify the mortgage presented to the court, but Sun told the mortgage on behalf of the plaintiff. The plaintiff admits that the enforcement notice it will hold the mortgage on the Sun that the plaintiff had been ratified by the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 823, and held that the plaintiff has given notice to the defendant, the mortgagor and the mortgagee (plaintiff's claim 795/2495).
Supreme Court in 1640/2516.
The District has issued a Certificate. (Ms. 3), in which case the owner of the land. The Land Office issued the title deed to the disputed land to the owner. The original Certificate shall be considered to be canceled pursuant to Section 63 of the Land Code. The land owner has the original Certificate is to be mortgaged to the plaintiff by a mortgage registered at the District Office. Then the land owner has a deed to this land sale to children. The defendant registered the sale of the Land Office. Redemptions are not within the plaintiff may be mortgaged by registering correctly and honestly, it was found to be effective. Land disputes are not. Plaintiff, the mortgagee has no right to compel the defendant. (The transferee trustee, the dispute), redeem the disputed land from the plaintiff.
(Meeting No. 9 / 2516).
Supreme Court in 1536/2511.
The court verdict is required. When it appears that the two defendants are secured by property mortgage debt to the plaintiff. The plaintiffs also sued the mortgage on the defendant to two, which the court has sentenced the defendant at a cost to the plaintiff if the defendant is a non-payment is the defendant's two redeeming the mortgage and the amount of debt that the defendant first must be paid and, if applicable. sale of mortgaged property, mortgage payments, but not enough to seize the plaintiff. Another defendant, a sale of the debt until the end as when a defendant is a non-paying defendants two of the mortgage as security for debts of the defendant that one must be paying off the mortgage to repay the ruling to parry, the people must be forced to mortgage The two defendants did not pay the debt or paying off a mortgage. I was forced to auction the mortgaged property, mortgage, according to the verdict. The plaintiff is entitled to seize the mortgage to the defendant at the second auction will be claimed under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 688 689 690 was used as a guarantee of benefits they can not. Otherwise, the provisions of the mortgage, then it would be useless and wrong principles. Mortgage debt as collateral to pay the other party.
Section 723 if the mortgaged property damage. If the property is mortgaged, but something is lost or damage. That is why insurance is not enough to know that He said mortgage, the mortgagee shall pay in immediately. Except when the reason is because it is not the fault of the mortgage. The mortgage is a mortgage for another property to have enough to offer. Repair the damage within a reasonable time.
Section 724 and any mortgage insurance to mortgage its assets to another party to pay the debt. And to repay the loan itself shall not be forced to parry a mortgage. If you prefer that the mortgage is to get money from the debtor for the amount they have paid.
If that is the mortgage. That the mortgage you would like to receive a refund of the amount receivable by the mortgagee. Will be forced to repay the debt of the mortgage.
Section 725 on two people or more were on their mortgage assets to guarantee debt, but One only has to pay the other party and does not specify the order of the gem. He said the mortgage is a loan. A property owner must apply for a mortgage, the mortgagor is entitled to recourse to the other can not.
Section 726 on several persons were on their mortgage assets to guarantee debt, but the only one. The others are to be paid and specify the order with a gem. You agree that the mortgagee to the mortgage debt that one. Would make the mortgage, the latter can escape with just his size, but they have been damaged.
Section 727 if one of their mortgage assets to guarantee debt of another person must be paid. To the provisions of Section 697, 700 and 701 are secured by the enforcement provisions as it should.
Supreme Court to 10532/2551.
The defendant is a land title deed No. 12,844 to No. 2 after the defendant had mortgaged to the registration of a servitude agreement to the plaintiff by the defendant at the second site without permission. The servitude is registered in the land must not make it worse. The rights of the defendant, a second mortgagee in the mortgaged land under Section 722 of the fact that when a court can not sell it by auction to 9 times, but not yet registered to servitude. plaintiff If the price of the mortgaged property registration was reduced to servitude, the prejudice to the right of the defendant at the time the second mortgage. The rights of the defendant's second mortgage was registered before it is larger than the servitude of the plaintiff accused the two do not have to deliver the said land to the land official in Saraburi, Nong registered to servitude to the plaintiff.
Supreme Court in 3232/2545.
Letter dated October 25, 2538, the second defendant as a guarantor of the plaintiff. To repay debt and redeem the outstanding debt under a mortgage is 250,000 baht, the second defendant to the plaintiff already checked the calculation of interest on the amount. Then inform the defendant of the two within a month to the second defendant to repay debt and redeem the mortgage. The plaintiff does not specify the need to calculate interest. The plaintiff notified the defendant that the second payment of U.S. $ 819,685.54 identified as outstanding as of July 28, 2536 on outstanding claims do not match each other. And the initial interest rate that does not appear to be starting any day. If the two do not match or the defendant intends to repay the debt to be correct. I like to argue to the plaintiff by requesting the repayment of debt is the total debt of Baht 250,000 contract, plus interest from the date of the loan overdraft with the defendant, one for the plaintiff's termination was November 9. 2, 2533, but the defendant can not therefore be considered whether the defendant has requested that the two obligations. And the plaintiff accepted the settlement because the two defendants released from liability under the guarantee, and mortgage contract under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 701 727 and 744 (3).
Supreme Court to 566/2536.
Describe the plaintiff sued the defendants for a loan to buy glass bottles and glass bottles are not from the plaintiff since 2515 several consecutive Tึgp.s. 2522 when it was thought that the defendant's account that one does not. sent are not returned the plaintiff the amount of 54,788 is the amount of 687,551 baht, the defendant first had to pay for a wooden crate for the plaintiff to 4, the remaining money to the defendant at first will be a wooden crate to the plaintiff 687,547 baht as follows: indictment, to understand it. Please do not be vague The story of a wooden crate that is the price and type of wood that had been the first one to return at any time. How much of the rest are details that must attest to the floor. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 649 is liable to pay compensation to Iืmใchgcgrop. But according to the complaint, the plaintiff sued to recover a crate or a wooden crate for the defendant to a borrower with a glass bottle products. The plaintiff sold to defendant a contract with the plaintiff and the defendant at a time since being traded to the provisions of section 649 comes into force can not. The age of 10 years under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 164, the second mortgage agreement specifies only that the defendant's mortgage and converting the land to the mortgagee as a security for trading. The company's products, glass bottles, even when I had the first defendant in the mortgage contract. 1 owe the plaintiff the value of products, glass bottles and the wooden crate. However, when not specified in the contract that the mortgage insurance. The payment of a wooden crate, and it is obvious that non-wood products, glass bottles are the only two defendants entered the mortgage insurance and credit of the defendant. And not only that a defendant has two or more positions with the defendants in a case like this should be the intent of the parties is suspected in a mortgage. Must be interpreted in a way that you are the defendant. 2, the party will be disadvantaged in debt, according to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 11 of the mortgage contract, the defendant, the three land as collateral for repayment of the defendant at first to buy the bottle from the plaintiff on the same day. The defendant entered into two mortgages, simply stated that the land as collateral for a mortgage in order. Buy a bottle of the defendant, as specified in the mortgage contract, the defendant made to land two of three defendants to insure mortgage loans, it is the same. The debt may not be distinguishable. The second defendant was not liable for the mortgage debt and mortgage debt, the third defendant was not liable by a third defendant will not appeal and petition. The Supreme Court agreed with the defendant's decision to No. 3 with the Code of Civil Procedure Section 245 (a) of Section 247.
Supreme Court in 9156/2538.
2 and 3, the defendant entered into an overdraft with a song with. Agreement by the debtor and the defendant plead guilty to the 2nd and 3rd. The land and building, the defendant No. 2 and No. 3. Ownership share. The debt is guaranteed under the overdraft with the defendant, 2 and 3. Krrmsittisrwm in property owned jointly mortgaged property is mortgaged. The demand for insurance payments under the overdraft of the defendant. 2 and 3, the defendant, 2 and 3 as part of the debtor class. The second layer is a debtor under the mortgage debt guarantees and equipment. Only by the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 724 does not grant the defendant. 2 and 3, which was initially due to take recourse to remove them. , A mortgage and even before. The agreement by the two defendants plead guilty with the debtor and the third one was. Meaning simply that the. They are liable with the defendant, 2 and 3, I mean big. It has become the primary debtor, as defendants 2 and 3, with no. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 693 granted the defendants 2 and 3, that is. Remove from recourse. This is not a guarantee. 2 and 3, and the defendant is not a creditor and a debtor to make a deduction. Eliminated due to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 341, when the screening. Opposition to the proceeds from the sale of land and buildings of the defendant. 2 and 3 in this case, the repayment of U.S. $ 9,429,863 to the claimant as a creditor. Insurance before other creditors who have no right to object to the amount of money. U.S. $ 3,143,287.66 with the money to get some of the netting. To gain from the sale, the auctioneer.
Supreme Court to 382/2537.
The current card is a customer of the defendant that the plaintiff does not appear in the current account of the evidence. After the end of the loan agreement overdraft defendant to a request from the account or the plaintiff give the defendant an overdraft to go even after the expiration of the loan overdraft defendant 1. 2 Although the current account is the account to pay off debts. Not so with the current account to no manner of walking. Widespread tax offset each other. Such circumstances, the plaintiff and defendant did not intend to renew an overdraft loan anymore. Recover the overdraft account, which would terminate the contract and the date. Due under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 856, the plaintiff is entitled to charge interest until the end of the agreement. The plaintiff still has the right to charge interest without compounding until the debt is paid. This is done to the plaintiff accused the three of guarantee, and mortgage land to secure the debt under the loan overdraft of the defendant at first made to the plaintiff in the amount of 400,000 baht, or up to 400,000 baht, showing that the defendant's third offer guarantees. and land to secure payment of obligations under loan agreements over Account of the fact that a budget of 400,000 baht, but it would appear that the plaintiff consented to the defendant a loan overdraft exceeding 400,000 baht, it is a commitment between the accused 1 and accused 2, managing partner of the defendant No. 1 to the plaintiff only The three defendants are bound by the contract, so at the end of the third defendant to pay the defendant's request that an amount of 400,000 baht to the plaintiff along with interest. It is the plaintiff's debt, which is payable on the debt due by it. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 701, first paragraph, when the plaintiff does not accept payment from the defendant that would make the three defendants. 3, which is releasing the guarantor from liability for payment of debts. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 701 727 of Section 744 (3).
Supreme Court in 3880/2535.
The defendant entered into an agreement to borrow from a bank overdraft T. The plaintiff land as collateral. The defendant did not repay the bank. Tho plaintiff paid the defendant. Plaintiffs shall have recourse to the defendant to reimburse the plaintiff for the amount paid to the Bank in accordance with Section 724, but the plaintiff did not exercise such recourse. I agree with the defendant made the same letter says. Since the defendant as a loan. The plaintiff presented the check as security for a loan. And agrees to repay the loan each month until the end. Such cases can be considered a debt incurred as well as documents that do. Change is the essence of the debt. It is a new debt. Result in the suspension of debt to the plaintiff sued the defendant was like to be in debt, according to the document.
Supreme Court in 5783/2533.
Barker lease dispute. On payment of lease due to transfer to the petitioner by the name of the debtor, the first in the land of the debtor, the first to land as collateral to raise money to trade with debtor a written confirmation delivered to customers. that ownership of the disputed claim of the petitioner. And to restore the petitioner to redeem the mortgage within a year, it said. The dispute is the property of a debtor who is the petitioner named in the deed as an owner instead. Although it took the dispute to a debtor does not redeem the mortgage. The petitioner as owner of the mortgaged property is entitled to redeem the mortgage itself. If you would like to call for redemption of mortgage loans to pay the redemption of a mortgage. When I redeem the mortgage, the mortgage would be forced to suspend the redemption of a mortgage loan that is not repeated.
Supreme Court in 4230/2528.
The mortgage sued to revoke the legal rent property The mortgage made by the tenant conspired with the knowledge that the mortgage contract. And agreement to the mortgage contract. Cause damage to the enforcement of the mortgagee that the mortgaged property, such cases may lead to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 722 of the cases used to be. It's not the right person to hire property or property rights of servitude, otherwise it must be taken to the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 237 was adapted to the case.
Supreme Court in 1187/2517.
In the case of mortgaged property as security for the debts of the others. The enforcement of the Civil and Commercial Code. The mortgage. It does not contain provisions similar to Section 689 shall apply for a mortgage to secure the enforcement of the settlement. Does not assets of the debtor and the creditor will be required to remove from the property. Does not guarantee it.
Supreme Court in 2427/2518.
Although the plaintiff did not present the Limited Power of Attorney shall notify the mortgage presented to the court, but Sun told the mortgage on behalf of the plaintiff. The plaintiff admits that the enforcement notice it will hold the mortgage on the Sun that the plaintiff had been ratified by the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 823, and held that the plaintiff has given notice to the defendant, the mortgagor and the mortgagee (plaintiff's claim 795/2495).
Supreme Court in 1640/2516.
The District has issued a Certificate. (Ms. 3), in which case the owner of the land. The Land Office issued the title deed to the disputed land to the owner. The original Certificate shall be considered to be canceled pursuant to Section 63 of the Land Code. The land owner has the original Certificate is to be mortgaged to the plaintiff by a mortgage registered at the District Office. Then the land owner has a deed to this land sale to children. The defendant registered the sale of the Land Office. Redemptions are not within the plaintiff may be mortgaged by registering correctly and honestly, it was found to be effective. Land disputes are not. Plaintiff, the mortgagee has no right to compel the defendant. (The transferee trustee, the dispute), redeem the disputed land from the plaintiff.
(Meeting No. 9 / 2516).
Supreme Court in 1536/2511.
The court verdict is required. When it appears that the two defendants are secured by property mortgage debt to the plaintiff. The plaintiffs also sued the mortgage on the defendant to two, which the court has sentenced the defendant at a cost to the plaintiff if the defendant is a non-payment is the defendant's two redeeming the mortgage and the amount of debt that the defendant first must be paid and, if applicable. sale of mortgaged property, mortgage payments, but not enough to seize the plaintiff. Another defendant, a sale of the debt until the end as when a defendant is a non-paying defendants two of the mortgage as security for debts of the defendant that one must be paying off the mortgage to repay the ruling to parry, the people must be forced to mortgage The two defendants did not pay the debt or paying off a mortgage. I was forced to auction the mortgaged property, mortgage, according to the verdict. The plaintiff is entitled to seize the mortgage to the defendant at the second auction will be claimed under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 688 689 690 was used as a guarantee of benefits they can not. Otherwise, the provisions of the mortgage, then it would be useless and wrong principles. Mortgage debt as collateral to pay the other party.
