1. In Small Cause Court Suit No. 481/ 275 of 1956 the plaintiff claimed thika rent with regard to two Mahua trees and a Mango tree for a period of three years at a jama of Rs. 25/- for each tree per year, Similarly, in Small Cause Court Suit 490/282 of 1956 the plaintiff claimed thika rent for three years with regard to three mango trees at a jama of Rs. 20.00 for each tree per year from the defendant of that suit. In both the suits the defence was that no lease was taken of the trees. It was also contended that the Kabuliyats, exhibits 1 and 1 (a), upon which the plaintiff relied, were unregistered instruments and so should not have been admitted in evidence in view of the provisions of Section 49 and Section. 17 (1) (d) of the Indian Registration Act. The lower Court rejected the argument of the defendants and gave a decree in favour of the plaintiff for the amount claimed in both the Small Cause Court Suits.

2. In support of these two applications the main contention put forward by learned Counsel is that the Small Cause Court has committed an error of law in having taken the two unregistered Kabuliyats, exhibits 1 and 1 (a), into evidence in order to prove the claim for