LOAN AND MORTGAGE AGREEMENTLoan and Mortgage Agreement • May 27th, 2021
Insert name of Originator here, a corporation duly organized and existing under Philippine laws, with principal place of business at Insert place of business here and herein represented by Insert name of authorized representative here, who is duly authorized for this purpose (as evidenced by a Secretary’s Certificate/Board Resolution, attached as ANNEX “A”), hereinafter referred to as "ORIGINATING INSTITUTION";
ContractLoan and Mortgage Agreement • November 2nd, 2016 • New South Wales
This Loan and Mortgage Agreement comprises the Loan and Mortgage Schedule and these Terms and Conditions made on the date in the Schedule between CNH Industrial Capital, you and any Guarantor named in the Schedule.
ContractLoan and Mortgage Agreement • April 4th, 2014 • New South Wales
This Loan and Mortgage Agreement comprises the Loan and Mortgage Schedule and these Terms and Conditions made on the date in the Schedule between CNH Industrial Capital, you and any Guarantor named in the Schedule.
Loan And Mortgage AgreementLoan and Mortgage Agreement • July 20th, 2021
Interested in the csps and loan mortgage agreement as waiver of the financial hardship. See earnest money that one mortgage basics to time to be liable to a mortgage market assistance payments are not include credit agreement?
AGREEMENT (Real Estate)Loan and Mortgage Agreement • August 22nd, 2024
This Uniform Loan and Mortgage Agreement (the “Agreement”), duly executed and delivered by and between the undersigned parties and hereinafter referred to as “Borrower/Mortgagor”, irrespective of number, and “Bank/Financial Institution/”, respectively:
CASE DIGESTLoan and Mortgage Agreement • September 15th, 2022
By a loan and mortgage agreement, Kan Biscuits Company Ltd. (Respondent) took a term loan of US$921,080.00, U8$25,094.00 and N1,568,000.00 from the Nigerian Industrial Development Bank Ltd. (1st Appellant) to acquire additional plant, equipment and machinery for its biscuit factory project (Kan Biscuit Factory). In default, M.M Adaba (2nd Appellant) was appointed as Receiver. On this note, the Respondent sued the Appellants at the Federal High Court (trial Court), challenging the appointment of the 2nd Appellant by the 1st Appellant as Receiver in respect of the assets of the Respondent. Nevertheless, while the matter was pending before the trial court, the Appellants went ahead and sold the factory of the Respondent to DE-ENDY INDUSTRIAL COMPANY LIMITED. Consequently, the Respondent by a motion on notice before the Federal High Court where the matter was pending, sought to set aside the sale being made pendente lite. The trial court delivered its ruling on the motion and thus set asid
