Judgment

Patanjali Sastri J. - This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the respondents against the appellant and other members of his joint family to enforce a mortgage alleged to have been created by the appellant by deposit of his joint family to enforce a mortgage alleged to have been created by the appellant by deposit of title deeds on 23rd October 1936 at Calcutta.

2. The short point for determination in the appeal is whether the memorandum signed and delivered by the appellant on 23rd October 1936 and relied upon by the respondents as evidencing the creation of the mortgage was compulsorily registrable under S.17, Registration Act, 1908, and, not having been registered, was inadmissible in evidence to prove the mortgage. The Subordinate Judge of Darbhanga who tried the suit, and the High Court at Patna on appeal, held that the document did not require registration and was admissible in evidence, and accordingly decreed the suit.

3. The question turns on the proper construction of the memorandum and the circumstances under which it was delivered to the respondents. According to the evidence of the respondents witnesses which has been accepted by the Courts below, the acc