AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Adakkalam v. Theethan I.L.R., 12 Mad., 505, is authority for holding that a document which, for want of registration is not admissible in
evidence as creating an interest in land, is admissible for the purpose of obtaining specific performance of the contract, which is in effect the object
of the present suit; and Nynakka Routhen v. Vavana Mahomed Naina Routhen 5 M.H.C.R. 123 is authority for the admission of secondary
evidence in case of a document being allowed to remain unregistered through no fault of the plaintiff. In either case, therefore, the Subordinate
Judge''s decision is wrong.
The Munsif has found that there was an agreement for sale.
The Lower Appellate Court having dismissed the suit on a preliminary point without going into the merits of the case, we set aside the decree
and remand the case for replacement on the tile and disposal on merits. The costs of this appeal will be paid by the respondent. The costs hitherto
incurred will be provided for in the revised decree.