AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 116 words
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.
Betha Naicken ILR 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.