Whether registration of the memorandum necessary.

This revision petition filed by the defendant is directed against the order made by the District Judge of Nilgiris at Uthagamandalam that the memo of deposit of title deeds in the instant case did not require registration and was, therefore, admissible in evidence.

2. The question arises in the following way : The plaintiff brought a suit against the defendant-present petitioner claiming a sum of Rs. 22,168, on the basis of a promissory note executed by the defendant on 22-4-1980. This amount, according to the plaintiff, was the price of fertilizers supplied to the defendant by the plaintiff-company. The promissory note makes the amount of Rs. 20,062-29 p. payable with interest at 1.50 per cent per annum. On 1-7-1980, the defendant deposited title deeds in respect of his property, according to the plaintiff, with intent to create an equitable mortgage of the property covered by the title deed for repayment of the moneys due under the pronote dated 22-4-1980. The plaint alleges that the Letter dated 1-7-1980 creating equitable mortgage and the memorandum accompanying the deposit of title deeds together with the title deeds dated 24-11-1966 and 9-12-1966 and the encumbrance certificate are also filed. The memorandum in dispute reads as follows -

Equitable mortgage (Memorandum accompanying a deposit of deeds.)

I.H.G. Nanjappa, son of Hanuma Gowder, Hindu, resident of Yellanahalli, Ketti village, the Nilgiris, in consideration of the sum of Rs. 20,062-29 np. (Rs. Twenty thousand and sixty two and np twenty nine) advanced to me by Messrs. Mysore Fertilizer Co., Commercial Road, Ootacamund, on a promissory note, which I do hereby acknowledge, have this 1st day of July 1980 at Coimbatore, deposited with the said Messrs. Mysore Fertilisers Co., the deeds and documents set out in the list hereto, as security for the repayment of the said sum of Rs. 20,062.29 np. with interest thereon at 18 per cent per annum from the date hereof till full payment.

As witness my hand this 1st day of July, 1980.

Sd/-

Mortgagor.

List of deeds deposited -

1. Registered sale-deed dated 24-11-1966 executed by M. Ajja Gowder and Kala Gowder in favour of H.C. Nanjappa (Document No. 1355 of 1966).

2. Registered sale deed dated 9-12-1966 executed by N.R. Purushothama Naidu in favour of H.G. Nanjappa (Document No. 1430 of 1966).

3. Nil encumbrance certificate in respect of properties from 1-1-1968 to 13-2-1980 issued by the Sub Registrar, Coonoor. (Mortgagor)

"3. Apart from the money decree claimed by the plaintiff, the plaintiff also claimed a decree declaring that the amount is due under the mortgage deed dated 1-7-1980, and directing the defendant to deposit the said sum into Court on or before a date to be fixed by the Court and on failure to make such deposit, the plaintiff asked for a direction for the sale of the properties which are the subject-matter of the equitable mortgage.

4. The defendant in the written statement denied that there was any consideration for the promissory note. He has further pleaded that since there is no consideration for the promissory note, the deposit alleged also has no consideration and is not enforceable. He further took the plea that the memorandum alleged is not admissible in law and is bad for want of registration and the suit laid as one on a mortgage is not sustainable in law.

5. Parties went to trial and when the evidence of the plaintiff was being recorded and the plaintiff wanted the memorandum to be marked as an exhibit, an objection was taken on the ground that the memorandum required registration. The order of the learned District Judge shows that the matter was exhaustively argued before him. The learned Judge posed the question whether the parties intended to reduce their bargain regarding the deposit of the title deeds to the form of a document and pointed out that if that was the intention, the document would require registration and if on the other hand, its proper construction and the surrounding circumstance