Analysis of the Content and Form of the Claim for the Enforcement of Mortgage Redemption A Critical Study of the Unification Judgment No. 832 of the General Assembly of the Supreme Court

The Unification Judgment No. 832 of the general assembly of the supreme court, has ended the debate about the possibility of filing a lawsuit against the mortgage of the same debtor by the buyer and the transferee in general. The content of the above-mentioned verdict indirectly indicates the possibility of transferring the mortgaged property by the mortgagor. It is clear that the non-invalidity of this transaction does not mean that it is entirely valid, but this transaction is in compliance with the rights of the mortgagor, and therefore, it is considered to have the state of Adam Nofouz Mora'a. Accordingly, in cases where the transaction is made with the preservation of the rights of the mortgagor, it is not possible to file a claim against the mortgagor, regardless of whether the debtor of the assigned debt has also changed and the transferee is considered a debtor, or the debtor has not been transferred but the transferee has accepted the collection of the debt from the debtor; Although the claim for the mortgage redemption has priority over the lawsuit obliging against the mortgagor to redeem the mortgaged property, and moreover, the enforcement of the lawsuit for the mortgage redemption has priority over the claim for annulment of the transfer of mortgaged property.