1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs respondents for recovery of possession on the basis of a leas dated 14th October 1912. The claim was resisted on the ground, among others, that the lease, the basis of the claim, was inadmissible in evidence as it was unregistered. The Court of first instance accepted this plea in defence and dismissed the claim.
2. On appeal the learned District Judge disagreeing with the first Court, held that the leas in question being an agricultural lease for a term not exceeding five years and reserving a term not exceeding five years and reserving a rent less than Rs. 50 was exempted by a notification of the Local Government from registration and was admissible in evidence. The decree of the first Court was set aside and the case was remanded under Order XLI, Rule 23, Civil Procedure Code, for trial on the merits. The defendants have come up in appeal to this Court and object to the order of the lower Appellate Court on two grounds. They say that the lease dated the 14th of October 1912 is not an agricultural lease and that the notification of the Local Government dated 1885 is inapplicable in view of the new Registration Act, XVI of 1908. We think that neither of the contentions is well founded We agree with the lower Appellate Court in holding, after a perusal of the lease in question, that it is an agricultural lease. The notification of the Local Government dated 1885 exempting certain leases from registration is still in force in site of Act XVI of 1908, as by the Act the said notification was not modified or cancelled and will be considered to be still in force in view of Section 24 of the General Clause Act, X of 1897. The appeal therefore, fail sand is dismissed with costs.