1. The second appeal arises out of a suit for redemption of a mortgage; and two questions are raised by the appellant, the fourth defendant, who lost in both the lower courts. The first is that the suit property belonged exclusively to her tawazhi.

2. The main tarwad of the appellant was known as the Edamuttathu tarwad. It was partitioned into two branches; and one of the branches had three sub-branches or tavazhies, Kulavarathala, Pulimoodu and Kottarakonathu. The plaintiff-respondents belonged to the first tavazhi; and the appellant and the other defendants belonged to the second tavazhi. The respondents claimed that they purchased the right of the third tavazhi; and they therefore claimed redemption of two shares out of three of the mortgage and the purakatom. One of the pleas raised by the appellant was that the mortgage and the purakatom were executed by her tawazhi. a partition having taken place in the branch earlier to the mortgage and the purakatom. It is the same contention that is reiterated before me.

3. Reliance is placed by the appellant on Ex. N for this contention. Ex. N is a mortgage document, under which several individuals are given separate shares in t