Is a mortgage agreement still in full force and effect when it is not?

The plaintiff, herein, mistakenly assumed that the mortgage agreement between itself and the defendant and his wife, was still in full force and effect on July 15, 1977, and therefore was obliged to pay the taxes for the year 1977 as a result of having collected from the defendant moneys to be applied to the taxes from the monthly mortgage payments that were made. If the plaintiff had been correct in this regard it would have been obliged to pay the taxes herein. This not being the case, the plaintiff is entitled to recover the moneys back and in this particular instance it is not unconscionable for it to do so. The passage quoted from Kelly v. Solari above does not restrict the plaintiff in his action to suing the payee but simply provides that “an action will lie to recover it back”.