An unregistered document that is properly stamped can be admitted in evidence for collateral purposes, such as showing the nature of possession, date of taking possession, evidence of attornment, admission of the other party, purpose of letting the premises, and receipt of consideration.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition is directed against a judgment and decree dismissing the suit of the plaintiff filed for recovery of Rs. 660. 00 including interest on security deposit of Rs. 6000. 00 from the defendant/revision petitioner for the period from 1st May 1980 to February 1983.

( 2 ) THE relevant facts which have led to the plaintiff of this revision petition are as under:

ACCORDING to the defendant/revision petitioner, Jai Narain Goel, plainitff/ respondent was tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 35. 00 in respect of entire ground floor of Premises No. Vll/339 (Old)/vii/927 (New), Anaj Mandi situated in Khasra No. 642 Mauza Chandrawali @ Shahdara, Delhi-32. Plaintiff/respondent surrenderd his tenancy rights in respect of the back godown portion and the defendant/petitioner agreed to let out the remaining portion on a lease of 99 years on monthly rent of Rs. 21. 00. Lease Deed (Ex. D-l) and Agreement (Mark "a ) were executed on 27th November, 1974. Lease Deed was got registered. The defendant/petitioner accepted the execution of the two deeds. Lease deed was got registered but not the agreement. According to the revision petitioner/defendant, he had signed the agreement of security deposit of Rs. 6000. 00 in anticipation of payment in good faith, but the amount not paid. Thus the agreement was never acted upon. Thus, the plaintiff claimed that he had given an amount of Rs. 6000. 00 on security deposit. The defendant/petitioner has denied the deposit of the security amnt. He also denied to have agreed to pay interest thereof.

( 3 ). The plaintiff filed the suit as aforesaid for recovery of Rs. 660. 00 as the security deposit of Rs. 6000. 00.

( 4 ). The learned Judge, Small Cause Court took the view that a sum of Rs. 6000. 00 was given as security deposit to the defendant/petitioner and it was to carry interest at the rate of 21% per annum. The aforesaid deposit did not create or extinguish any interest in the property and as such, it did not require registration under Section 17 of the Registration Act. The Lease Deed was separately registered. Trough the suit of the plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 660. 00 was dismissed but it was held that the rent of the defendant had been adjusted towards the payment of interest.

( 5 ) 5. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the present revision petition has been filed.

( 6 ). I have heard the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner and have gone through the record: It was contended by the learned Counsel that the agreement relating to security deposit not being registered under Section 17 of the Registration Act could not have been admitted in evidence and acted upon by the learned Judge, Small Cause Court. It was further contended that there was misreading of the evidence by the learned Judge, Small Cause Court and that the Court below failed to consider the receipts Ex. D-2 to D-7 admitted by the plaintiff.

( 7 ). Taking the second point first, learned Counsel has drawn my attention to receip ts Ex. D-2 to D-7. The plain tiff Jai Narain Goel, in cross-examination admitted his signatures on the counter-foils of receipts Nos. 34, 35, 36, 40 and 41. These receipts have been exhibited as Ex. D-2 to D-7. Ex. D-8 to D-10 the money order coupons of money orders sent and written by the plaintiff himself were also admitted. Ex. D-2 is of 17th October 1974 indicating that rate of rent was Rs. 40. 00 and on that date, a sum of Rs. 1517. 00 was in arrears towards rent. Out of these Rs. 1517. 00 , only Rs. 250. 00 were paid, leaving a balance of Rs. 1320. 00. Receipt Ex. D-3 is dated 10th April 1977. This indicated that rate of rent was Rs. 40. 00 and that out of Rs. 1440. 00 including a sum of Rs. 1380. 00 only Rs. 40. 00 were paid and Rs. 1400. 00 remained as arrears of rent Ex. D-4 is probably of May 1977 (the date is not legible in the photocopy of Ex. D-4), indicated that rate of rent was Rs. 21. 00 Out of Rs. 1582. 75, Rs. 462. 75 were paid,leaving a balance o