Unregistered lease deed can be used for collateral purposes; tenancy findings based on evidence were upheld in second appeal.

An unregistered lease deed may still be relied on for collateral purposes, including to examine the nature of possession and the relationship between the parties, when supported by other evidence. On the facts discussed, the lower appellate court's reliance on the lease document, attesting witness testimony, surrounding circumstances, and the tenant's failure to enter the witness-box was treated as a possible view. The finding that tenancy was proved and validly terminated was therefore not disturbed, and the challenge based on alleged surrender of tenancy did not succeed. The discussion also indicates that such concurrent findings will not be interfered with in second appeal unless shown to be perverse or unsupported by the record.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the lease agreement relied upon by the plaintiff was proved so as to establish the relationship of landlord and tenant and the validity of termination of tenancy, and whether the challenge based on surrender of tenancy could succeed; (ii) whether the unregistered lease deed was inadmissible in evidence or could still be looked into for collateral purposes.

Issue (i): whether the lease agreement relied upon by the plaintiff was proved so as to establish the relationship of landlord and tenant and the validity of termination of tenancy, and whether the challenge based on surrender of tenancy could succeed.

Analysis: The findings of the lower appellate court were based on the lease document, the evidence of the attesting witness, and the surrounding circumstances, including the conduct of the parties and the failure of the original tenant to enter the witness-box. The court held that the evidence supported the conclusion that the tenancy in favour of the original defendant had been established and validly terminated. The plea that the defendant No.2 had surrendered tenancy was not treated as a necessary issue for adjudication, since the consequential pleading lost significance in view of the defendants' own stand. The appreciation of evidence by the lower appellate court was found to be a possible view and not perverse.

Conclusion: The challenge to the finding that the tenancy stood proved and validly terminated failed, and the conclusion was against the appellant.

Issue (ii): whether the unregistered lease deed was inadmissible in evidence or could still be looked into for collateral purposes.

Analysis: The document was unregistered, but the court held that non-registration did not prevent its use for collateral purposes. The court accepted that an unregistered instrument could still be relied upon to examine the nature of possession and the relationship between the parties, especially when supported by other evidence on record.

Conclusion: The objection to admissibility failed, and the document could be considered for collateral purposes against the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The second appeal disclosed no substantial question of law and the decree in favour of the plaintiff was left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: An unregistered lease deed may be used for collateral purposes, and concurrent findings based on evidence of tenancy and termination will not be disturbed in second appeal unless shown to be perverse or unsupported by record.

---