In a Suit for recovery of money, a document, even if an unregistered mortgage deed, can be accepted as evidence to establish loan transactions between the parties.

V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J.

This Civil Revision Petition arises out of the dismissal of an Application filed by the plaintiff to mark a document dated 20.4.2005 as plaintiffs Exhibit.

2. Heard, Mr. S.R. Prem Anand, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.M. Vincent, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 415 of 2006, on the file of the sub-Court, Tiruchirapalli. It is a Suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,01,600/-.

4. When the Suit became ripe for trial, the petitioner/plaintiff filed an application in I.A. No. 511 of 2007 to mark a document dated 20.4.2005 as Exhibit A-2. On the objection that it is an unregistered mortgage deed hit by action 17 of the Registration Act, the Court below dismissed the Application and the petitioner/plaintiff is before this Court.

5. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Suit is merely one for recovery of money. It is not a Suit for foreclosure. Therefore the petitioner wanted to rely upon the document in question, just for the purpose of establishing the loan transactions between the parties. In such circumstances, when the petitioner is not suing on an unregistered mortgage deed, the Court below ought to have accepted the document to be marked in evidence. This is a settled position in law. Therefore, the Court below was wrong in rejecting the Application.

6. In view of the above, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed, the Order of the Court below in I.A. No. 511 of 2007 is set aside and the Court below is directed to permit the petitioner to mark the document in evidence. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

C.R.P. allowed.