Gopal Prasad Vs Nandarani

E. Jackson, J.@mdashThe Lower Appellate Court has dismissed the plaintiff''s suit, which was to recover a certain sum of money due upon a bond, on the ground that this bond ought to have been registered, and that it was not registered. The bond appears to have stated not only that the money would be repaid, but also that certain lands should be held to be pledged for the repayment of the loan in case it was not paid. The question at issue is, whether a bond of this description must be registered or not u/s 13 of Act XVI of 1864. In Udaya Chand Jana v. Nitai Mandal, (9 W.R. 111), it was held that the registration of such a bond was not compulsory. It appears to us also, that this document does not directly create, declare, transfer or extinguish any right or title in immoveable property. The land is mentioned in the bond as collateral security. But the bond goes no further. It follows that the registration of the bond was not compulsory. Holding this opinion, we think that the Judge should have proceeded to try the questions raised by the plaintiff on the merits. We, therefore, remand this case to the Lower Appellate Court for trial on the merits, and a fresh decision.