SECURITY OF ASSIGNMENTS

RIGHT TO SUE UNDER THE ASSIGNMENTS

NAME

REG NUM.

MONISYA SRI NARAJU

01DKB12F2019

KANAGAMBIGAI MUNIASAMY NAIDU

01DKB12F2016

SANTHIRIGA RAMAN

01DKB12F2017

JAGATHISWARY MANUKARAN

01DKB12F2073

ELLIL VINOOTTENI GUNALAN

01DKB12F2020

SIVANANDA GANASAN

01DKB12F2014

ASSIGNOR
ORIGINAL
PARTY TO
THE
CONTRACT

CAN BE AN
INDIVIDUAL,
GROUP OR
BUSINESS

THE PARTY
THAT
TRANSFERS
ITS
CONTRACTU
AL RIGHTS
TO ANOTHER
PARTY

ASSIGNMENT
DOESNT
ALWAYS
COMPLETELY
RELIEVE THE
ASSIGNOR

ASSIGNEE
PARTY THAT RECEIVES THE RIGHTS AND
OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE CONTRACT, BUT
WASNT AN ORIGINAL TO THE CONTRACT
CAN BE AN INDIVIDUAL, A GROUP OR A
BUSINESS
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF ASSIGNOR PASS
TO THE ASSIGNEE.
STEPS INTO THE SHOES OF ASSIGNOR.
ASSIGNEE CAN GENERALLY SUE OTHER PARTY

OBLIGOR
Obligor has same defences against
assignee as those against assignor
Obligor is a party that is obligated to do
something under the terms of a contract
you might be familiar with the term
obligor, because its often used to
describe a borrower or debtor.

E
E

N
G
I
S
T
S
A EN
Y
M
B N
E
G
I
U
S SS
A
O
T R
E
T
D
H
G UN
I
R

ASSIGNOR DEFAULTS IN HIS

LOAN REPAYMENT
ASSIGN
OR CAN
DISPOSE
THE
PROPER
TY

FAIL TO
MAKE
PAYMENT

THE FRAUDULENT FROM THE

ASSIGNOR
INTENDED TO MAKE
THE PROPERTY ASSIGN
TO HIM
PROVIDING
FALSE
INFORMATI
ON

NO IMPAIRMENT & INVALID

DOCUMENT
INTERFERE WITH
THE ASSIGNEES
ENFORCEMENTS
OF THE
OBLIGATION

THE
DOCUMEN
TS
DELIVERE
D ARE NO
GENUINE

CLAIM IS INVALID AND

ENCUMBERED
ASSIGNED
CLAIM IS
INVALID

IN
TERMS
OF
DEFENS
E

TORKINGTON V MAGEE
(1902)
DATE:01-JAN-1902
JUDGES:LORD ALVERSTONE CJ, DARLING AND
CHANNELL J
STATUTES:JUDICATURE ACT 1873 25(6)
REFERENCES:[1902] 2 KB 427,
ASSIGNOR: RAYNER
DEFENDENT: MAGEE
PLAINTIFF(ASSIGNEE): TORKINGTON
CONTRACT FOR A SALE OF PROPERTY

CASE SUMMARY:
DEFENDANT HAD CONTRACT WITH MR.RAYNER
TO SELL TO HIM THE DEFENDANTS
REVERSIONARY INTEREST IN A SUM CHARGED
CERTAIN
STOCK TO
AND
FUNDS. BY A DEED
ON
RAYNER
ASSIGNED
PLAINTIFF
HIS INTEREST IN THIS CONTRACT. WRITTEN
GIVEN
TO MAGEE.
NOTICE
AT DATEISOF
ASSIGNMENT
THERE IS NO
BREACH OF CONTRACT BUT AFTER SOME
SUBSEQUENT NEGOTIATIONS , THE PLAINTIFF
CONSIDER MAGEE HAD BROKEN THE
CONTRACT
BUT JUDICATURE ACT DID NOT ENTITLE THE
PLAINTIFF TO SUE IN HIS OWN NAME
THE PLAINTIFF APPEALED

COURT DECISION
CHANELL J
DEBTS AND OTHER CHOSES IN ACTION
PERSONAL RIGHTS OF PROPERTY WHICH CAN ONLY BE
CLAIMED OR ENFORCED BY ACTION, AND NOT BY TAKING
PHYSICAL POSSESSION
ASSIGNEE CAN SUE THE DEVELOPER/DEBTOR DIRECTLY
WITHOUT THE CONCURRENCE OF THE ASSIGNOR WHICH MEANS
THE ASSIGNOR CANNOT SUE THE DEVELOPER/DEBTOR DIRECTLY
WITHOUT THE CONCURRENCE OF THE ASSIGNEE UNLESS IT IS
AN ASSIGNMENT BY WAY OF CHARGE.

THANK YOU