BALAKRISHTNAMMA SUBUDHI Vs. VINAYAKA RAMA SINGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is not necessary to consider the effect of Section 50 of the Registration Act in this case, as we find that the second, defendant has been in possession as usufructuary mortgagee, although under an unregistered instrument, since 1877, and there is nothing in Section 50 of the Registration Act to affect the operation of the Law of Limitation in favour of a person who claims under an unregistered document vide Nallamuthu Pillai V/s. Betha Naicken I.L.R. 23 M. 37. The fact that the second defendant has been latterly for some years claiming under an invalid sale does not make his possession the less adverse to the plaintiff. This second appeal is dismissed with costs.