Narayan, J.

1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 800.00 as principal and Rs. 228/- as interest on the basis of a handnote, dated 17-2-1944, alleged to have been executed by the original defendant Ramlochan Sharma in favour of the plaintiff,

2. The defendant pleaded inter alia that the suit was not maintainable because the plff. was not a registered money-lender. This defence found favour with the Court of first instance, which dismissed the suit on the ground that the plaintiff was not a registered money-lender at the time when the loan was advanced. The defence however, was rejected by the lower appellate Court, and, in the result, the lower-appellate Court decreed the suit in full.

3. It appears that when the appeal before the District" Judge was pending, Ramlochan Sharma died and his widow, his sons and grandsons were substituted in his place, they being, the appellants before this Court.

4. The short point for determination in this appeal is whether the suit is maintainable even though the plaintiff was not a registered moneylender at the time when the loan was advanced. The contention of the plaintiff has been that though the plaintiff when he advanc