The Estate of Henry A. Keogh, Owner; William Leonard, Petitioner

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 08 November 1894
• Date: 08 November 1894
• Court: High Court

In the Matter of the Estate of Henry A. Keogh,

Owner

and

William Leonaed,

Petitioner.

Monroe, J.

CASES

DETERMINED BY

THE CHANCERY AND PROBATE DIVISIONS

OF

THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND,

AND BY

THE COURT OF BANKRUPTCY IN IRELAND,

AND ON APPEAL THEREFROM IN

THE COURT OF APPEAL.

1895.

Bank — Security for future advances — Petition for sale by incumbrancer — Service of notice to lodge deeds — Appropriation of payments.

An owner deposited title-deeds with his bankers, by way of equitable mortgage, to secure past and future advances. A petition for sale having been presented by a subsequent incumbrancer, notice to lodge deeds was served by the petitioner on the Bank:—

Held, that the petitioner was entitled to priority over any advances made after service of the notice.

Application by the petitioner for an order declaring whether the alleged lien of the Ulster Bank, Limited, against the sum of £198 standing to the credit of the matter was a valid and subsisting lien against the fund or not? and if found to affect said fund, whether the same was in priority to the petitioner's mortgages, or either of them? and that the fund in Court might be allocated.

On the 28th March, 1892, a petition was filed in the matter of Henry A. Keogh, owner, William Leonard, petitioner, on foot of two judgment mortgages, both registered on the 21st March, 1892, for sale of certain lands known as Roscolvin and Narrabeg. The lands of Roscolvin were alleged to be held under a fee-farm grant of the 6th October, 1705; and the lands of Narrabeg under three separate instruments, viz. a lease of the 22nd April, 1796, for 999 years; 2, a fee-farm grant of the 25th November, 1798; and, 3, a lease of the 11th February, 1859, for a term of 100 years. An absolute order for sale of these premises was made on the 7th June, 1892. After the order for sale had been made, the petitioner discovered that the owner had surrendered the lease of the 22nd April, 1796, and that he was entitled only to five-thirtieths of the same lands as comprised in a fee-farm grant of the 10th April, 1714. On the 16th September, 1892, the same petitioner filed a supplemental petition for sale, under the partition Acts, of the entire interest under this fee-farm grant; and a stay was put on the proceedings for sale of the owner's alleged interest under the lease of 22nd April, 1796. The owner of the other shares in the fee-farm grant showed cause against the conditional order, and offered to purchase the owner's shares at a valuation. This was agreed to; a valuation was made and confirmed, and the purchase money was lodged on the 4th July, 1893. The present motion having been instituted for...