Whether for creating EM consideration should pre exist

As has been held by various courts, since consideration could be past, present or future [ also refer Sec. 2(d) / 25 of contract Act], the disbursement of small amount for being covered under the definition ' creditor' is not necessary... The equitable mortgage even otherwise can not be enforced unless there exists some financial liability ...

I doubt whether any commercial bank is following the practice of disbursement of small amount for being covered under the definition of ' creditor'

What u will say....... ?.....  the words ' with intent to create security' equally important. who will decide as to whether the borrower / mortgagor had intent to create mortgage by deposit of title deeds ...  it is proved by way of subsequent actions only... if he takes back the title deeds then...? obviously, there will not be any mortgage and the position will stand still... bank will not incur any obligation....

Hope the position is clear

Thank U boss. I fully agree with you . not only sec 2d/25 of contract act , even sec 58 of TP act also mentions past and future consideration. However, sec 58f , clearly defines as deposit with creditor ,where as bank is not a creditor at the time of mortgage as money si not disbursed. Is there any specific court decision available on this? some banks are disbursing small amt before mortgage to address this problem.