SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1970 Supreme(AP) 48

P.RAMACHANDRA RAJU, S.OBUL REDDY
Kakaraparthy Bhavanarayana – Appellant
Versus
Official Receiver, Krishna – Respondent


RAMACHANDRA RAJU, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal arises out of a suit brought by the appellant against the respondents to enforce an equitable mortgage alleged to have been created by one late Sonti Venkataratnam, the father of respondents 2 to 5. The short point for determination in the appeal is whether Ex. A-7 styled as a letter signed and delivered by Sonti Venkataratanam on 7-11-1951 and relied upon by the appellant as evidencing the creation of the mortgage was compulsorily registrable under Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act and not having been registered was inadmissible in evidence to prove the mortgage. The learned Subordinate Judge who tried the sit held that the document required registration and was therefore inadmissible in evidence and accordingly dismissed the suit. Aggrieved by the said decision of the lower court the plaintiff has preferred this appeal.

( 2 ) ON the pleas taken by the defendants the lower court also framed some more issues and gave findings and the correctness of those findings is not now questioned before us.

( 3 ) IN order to properly appreciate the question involved a few facts may be stated. Late Sonti Venkataratnam used to borrow moneys from the












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top