A creates a charge on his property for securing a debt to B. What remedies does B have for recovery?

The Starting Point: B's Position under Section 100

When A makes his property security for the debt owed to B, without transferring any interest in the property — that is, without the transaction amounting to a mortgage — a charge is created under Section 100 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. B, the charge-holder, acquires no title to the property and no right of possession. As the Calcutta High Court clarified in Gobinda Chandra Pal v. Dwarka Nath Pal (1908, 35 Cal 837), a charge creates only a personal obligation — meaning it is simply a right to obtain payment from a specific fund, that fund being A's property. From this starting point flows the entirety of B's remedies.

Primary Remedy: Suit for Sale

B's foremost remedy, and indeed his only mode of enforcing the charge, is to bring a suit for the sale of the charged property through the court. Unlike a mortgagee who may also have the remedies of foreclosure, private sale, or a personal suit for recovery of money, B as a charge-holder is confined to this single avenue. He cannot foreclose; he cannot take possession; and since a charge involves no personal covenant to repay, he has no personal action against A as an individual. The court, on finding that the debt is due, will pass a decree directing the sale of A's property and will direct that B's debt be satisfied out of the sale proceeds.

A charge can also be enforced by a suit even when it is created by a decree. This is important where B's charge arises not from an express transaction between the parties but, for instance, from a court's order in partition or other proceedings.

Right Against Subsequent Transferees with Notice

If A, after creating the charge in B's favour, transfers the property to a third person, B can still enforce his charge against that person — but only if that person took the property with notice of the charge, or took it without consideration (i.e., as a gift). The proviso to Section 100 is the cornerstone here: no charge shall be enforced against any property in the hands of a person to whom it has been transferred for consideration and without notice of the charge. So, if A sells his property to C, who pays full value and has no actual or constructive notice of B's charge, B's remedy against that property is lost entirely. However, if C had notice — whether through registration of the charge instrument, which operates as constructive notice under Section 3 of the Act, or through actual knowledge — B can follow the property into C's hands and enforce the charge against him.

Protection Against Merger and Subsequent Encumbrancers

Section 101 gives B a significant protective right when A creates further encumbrances on the same property. It provides that no subsequent mortgagee or charge-holder shall be entitled to foreclose or sell A's property without first redeeming B's prior charge. This ensures that B's prior charge is not silently swept away by the enforcement of a later encumbrance. If a second creditor attempts to bring the property to sale under a subsequent mortgage, he must either redeem B's charge or conduct the sale subject to it — B's right to payment from the property remains intact. Moreover, even if B himself acquires A's ownership interest in the property — say, by purchasing it in execution — Section 101 ensures that this does not cause a merger of B's charge with his ownership as against subsequent charge-holders, so B's prior security survives.

Right to Redeem Prior Encumbrances

If A's property is already burdened by a prior mortgage when the charge is created in B's favour, B, like a simple mortgagee, has the right to redeem that prior mortgage. This prevents a prior mortgagee from foreclosing or selling the property and thereby extinguishing B's charge without offering B the opportunity to protect his interest. On redeeming the prior mortgage, B steps into the shoes of the prior mortgagee.

Right to Claim from Substituted Security

Where A's property — which was the subject of B's charge — is sold at a revenue sale or compulsorily acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, the simple mortgage provisions incorporated by Section 100 entitle B, like a simple mortgagee under Section 73, to claim payment of his debt out of the surplus sale proceeds remaining after satisfaction of the arrears, or out of the compensation money payable to A. The security, once gone, attaches to whatever takes its place in law. As the Supreme Court stated in DDA v. Skipper Construction Pvt. Ltd., if an immovable property that is charged is converted into another property or money, the charge fastens on that converted property or money.

Limitation Period

B must act within twelve years of the date on which the money secured by the charge became due. This mirrors the limitation period applicable to a simple mortgage. Failure to bring a suit for sale within this period will bar B's remedy entirely, and A's property will stand cleared of the charge.

What B Cannot Do

It is equally important to understand the boundaries of B's position. B cannot take possession of A's property; his charge is non-possessory in character. He cannot sell the property privately without a court order. He cannot sue A personally for the debt unless there is an express covenant in the charge instrument creating a personal liability — which, in the typical charge transaction, does not exist. And, as discussed, he cannot enforce the charge against a bona fide purchaser for value without notice.

In summary, B holds a carefully circumscribed but legally recognised security. His remedy is real but dependent on the court, effective against A and against transferees with notice, and subject to the overriding vulnerability that a clean sale of the property to an innocent purchaser without notice will defeat his claim entirely — making timely registration of the charge instrument not merely desirable but practically indispensable.