Judgement

Appeal (No. 59 of 1930) by special leave from a decree of the High Court at Madras (October 26, 1928) affirming a decree of the Subordinate Judge of Dindigul (November 3, 1923).

The plaintiff, since deceased, and represented by the respondents, brought a suit to enforce by sale a mortgage by deposit of documents of title alleged to have been made at Madras.

The sole question arising upon the appeal was whether or not a memorandum signed by the agent for the mortgagees and handed to the mortgagor was a document which by s. 17 of the Indian Registration Act required registration and was therefore by s. 49 inadmissible in evidence in the absence of registration.

The facts appear from the judgment of the Judicial Committee.

The High Court (Madhavan Nair and Jackson JJ.), affirming the Subordinate Judge, held that the memorandum was not within s. 17 and was admissible in evidence ; the usual mortgage decree was made with liberty to apply under Order xxxiv. for a personal decree if the sum realized was insufficient to discharge the debt.

1930. Dec. 5, 8. Upjohn K.C, and Narasimham for the appellants.

Dunne K.C. and Dube for the respondents.

[Reference was made to Subrarmonian v