Karnail Singh vs Hari Singh

J.V.Gupta, J.—This petition is directed against the order of the trial Court dated 13th May, 1983 whereby the receipt for a sum of Rs. 75/ which was marked as Exhibit DA was held to be inadmissible in evidence.

It is the common case of the parties that by virtue of the said receipt the mortgagee rights were extinguished and the same falls in clause (c) of sub section (1) of section 17 of the Indian Registration Act. According to the learned counsel for the defendantpetitioner, the value of the mortgagee rights extinguished thereby being less than Rs. 100/, it did not require any registration, whereas according to the learned counsel for the plaintiff respondent in view of the provisions of clause (c) of subsection (1) of Section 17 it required compulsory registration.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties I am of the considered view that the instrument which acknowledged the receipt of payment of any consideration on account of creation, declaration, assignment, limitation or extinction of any right, title or interest mentioned in aforesaid clause (c) means the right or title of the value as mentioned in clause (b) thereof i.e. the value of which should be Rs. 100/ or more. The words `such right'' in clause (c) is very significant. Such right referred to therein means the right, title etc. of the value as mentioned in clause (b) of subsection (1) of Section 17. That being so, the receipt marked DA could not be held to be inadmissible in evidence for want of registration. Consequently, this petition succeeds, and the receipt Exhibit DA is held to be admissible in evidence with no order as to costs.