KISHAN LAL Vs. SHEESH DAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals arise out of a single suit for recovery of money.

(2.) KISHAN Lal instituted the present suit on 15-5-1948, on the allegations that he had dealings with Pabu Dan and Kami Dan, defendants Nos. 1 and 2, and on 5-111938, the previous account was taken. Some more advance was made, and the two defendants executed a khata of Rs. 1701 and for repayment of the amount, they hypothecated their one-fourth share in the income of Dakaniyawas, and their half share in Kothi Phalsawali, situated in the same village, for 17 years from sarnwat 1995 to Sam-wat 2012, by way of Baraskatti, and it was stipulated that if the debtors did not permit the recovery of the income of this land in any year, they would pay Rs. 200 for that particular year. It was alleged that Chandi Dan and Ram Karan Dan stood as sureties for the carrying out of the aforesaid agreement. It was then alleged that the plaintiff recovered the income of the hypothecated land till Samwat 2001, but thereafter the debtors did not permit the recovery of the income from the hypothecated, land. The plaintiff claimed Rs. 600 for three years, Samwat 2002, Samwat 2003 and Samwat 2004, according to the agreement.

(3.) PABU Dan and Kami Dan denied execution of the Khata or having any dealings with the plaintiff at any time. Chandi Dan and Ram Karan Dan had both died, and their legal representatives Ranmal Dan son of Chandi Dan, and Gopal Dan son of ram Karan Dan, who were made defendants in the suit, also denied the execution of the Khata or having anything to do with the debt in question. A further plea was raised by both sets of defendants that the agreement amounted to a mortgage, and the document being unregistered, it was not admissible in evidence, and the agreement was not enforceable at law.