125-NLR-NLR-V-23-MATTICHCHAN-v.-MATTICHCHAN.pdf
( 466 )
MATTICHCHAN v. MATTICHCHAN.
420—D. C. Matara, 8,836.
Appeal—Bond hypothecating. money deposited—Registration not necessary.
S. J. O. Pereira, K.O. (with him Crooe-Dabrera and Coder), for appellant.E. W. Jayawordene (with him Zoysa and MendU), for respondents.September 21,1921. Bnnib J.—
In this case a preliminary objection has been taken on the ground that thebond hypothecating the amount deposited as security for the appeal has notbeen registered.
In my opinion section 767 does not go so far as to require the registrationof the bond, and Ordinance No. 8 of 1871 does not 8pply, inasmuch as underthat Ordinance a deposit of property is sufficient by itself to give validityto the hypothecation without a bond. The bond is merely required under
section 767 of the Civil Procedure Code.
1 accordingly overrule the objection..
Scknkidkb J.—I agree.
11C. L. Recorder 26.
(1921) 23 N. L. R. 463.