1. The Second Appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law :

i) Can the learned lower Appellate Court legally upset the finding of the learned trial Court dismissing the suit of the plaintiff on the ground that the impugned lease is for the period of five years and the same requires compulsory registration under Section 17 (1) (d) of the Registration Act in spite of observing that the unregistered document cannot be admitted for proving the relationship of Landlord and tenant and duration of the lease and allow the appeal ?

ii) Is the learned Appellate Court right in law to allow the appeal relying on the proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act that the lease document can be used for collateral purposes ?

2. This Second Appeal is filed by the appellant (Original Defendant) against the Judgment and Order, dated 21.12.2012 passed by District Judge, Akola in Regular Civil Appeal No.94 of 2005, which was allowed and the suit was decreed. The said appeal arose from the Judgement and Order, dated 29.7.2005 passed by the trial Court (Civil Judge (Jr. Dn., Murtizapur) in Regular Civil Suit No.21 of 2004. The suit for eviction, possession and damages