(1.) This is a plaintiff's second appeal against a decree of the lower Appellate Court reversing the Court of first instance which decreed the plaintiff's claim in part. The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought by the plaintiff for the recovery of Rs. 1,236 on the basis of a mortgage deed dated 2 August, 1928 which had been executed by one Jai Ram Tewari, deceased, in favour of the plaintiff for Rs. 799- 15.0. The defendants were the personal representatives of the deceased executant Jai Ram Tewari. The mortgage was a possessory mortgage and the suit was brought to recover the said sum of Rs. 1,236 on the ground that the mortgagor had failed to put the plaintiff in possession of the mortgaged property.
(2.) The defendants raised a number of defences, but it is only necessary in this appeal to consider one of them. They alleged that the mortgage was invalid by reason of the fact that it was registered in the Ballia district, whereas in fact the property was situate entirely in the district of Arrah in the Province of Bihar.
(3.) The learned Munsif decreed the plaintiff's claim in part, but on appeal the learned Civil Judge held that as no part of the property was situate within the Ballia district, the mortgage could not be received in evidence by reason of the provisions of Section 49, Registration Act, and consequently he reversed the trial Court and dismissed the claim in its entirety.