1. In execution of the decree, which is for redemption of a'nadappupanayam' (Ext. D-1), the 2nd defendant contended that the transaction was really one of tenancy and not a mortgage and that therefore, in spite of the decree, he is entitled to immunity from eviction. The Courts below concurred to repel that contention. Hence this second appeal.

2. It is conceded that the question has now to be decided under the provisions of the Act I of 1964. The document is styled a'nadappupanayam'. The contention is that it is either a kanam or a lease within the meaning of Act I of 1964. Sub-section (22) of S.2 of the Act defines a kanam thus:

"'Kanam' means the transfer for consideration, in money or in kind or in both, by a land lord of an interest in specific immovable property to another person for the latter's enjoyment, whether described in the document evidencing the transaction ' as kanam or kanapattam, the incidents of which transfer include

(a) a right in the transferee to hold the said property liable for the consideration paid by him or due to him;

(b) the liability of the transferor to pay to the transferee interest on such consideration unless otherwise agreed to by the pa