NANNHUN Vs. HALKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendant's appeal from the judgment dated 25 June 1927 of Mr. Sarup Narain, Subordinate Judge of Jhansi. The plaintiff brought a suit for the redemption of two houses, five trees, 24 plots of occupancy land and mesne profits, but the only matter for consideration now is the redemption of the 24 plots.

(2.) The facts as alleged by the plaintiff were that the plaintiff's father, one Har Gobind, in the mon December, 1899 executed a mortgage for Rs. 199 in favour of the ancestors of defendants 1 to 4. It was a term of the mortgage that if the mortgage was not paid off in the course of one year then the mortgagees were to take possession as if it were usufructuary mortgage. The plaintiff's case was that the mortgagees did take possession on the failure of the mortgagor to pay off the mortgage and enjoyed the usufruct for many years, and that the amount of money thus recovered by the mortgagees greatly exceeded the principal and interest of the mortgage. He, therefore, prayed for redemption, possession and mesne profits.

(3.) Three of the defendants, who were relatives and descendants of the original mortgagees, admitted that they were in possession as mortgagees. One defendant alone, the present appellant, also related to the mortgagees, did not so admit. All the defendants, however, challenged the deed on the ground that it was inadmissible in evidence on various grounds: 1. That the mortgage deed was improperly stamped: 2. That it was a document which ought to have been registered under Section 59, T.P. Act, and that it had not been registered, and, therefore, under Secs.17 and 49, Registration Act, was inadmissible in evidence; 3. That under Section 91, Evidence Act, the deed itself being inadmissible no other evidence was admissible, and