1. The only point taken in this second appeal by defendants 4 to 7 (who claim to be the assigns of the mortgagee 1st defendant) against the decree for redemption they have suffered, is that the plaintiff has not proved that the sale deed, Ext. P-2 dated 23 61118 M. E. (5-2-1943 A. D.), under which she claims title to redeem, was executed by the original mortgagor, Kaliamma Pillai, by whom it purports to be executed. But, Ext. P-2 is a registered document; it is not a document required by law to be attested; therefore, it does not attract S.68 of the Evidence Act; and the proof required by S.67 can be in any mode authorised by law. The endorsements on the document, duly certified under S.53 of the Travancore Registration Act, 1087, (corresponding to S.60 of the Indian Registration Act) show that the document was presented for registration by Kaliamma Pillai who admitted execution before the Registrar and signed an endorsement to that effect, that she was identified by two witnesses who signed an endorsement in token thereof, and that she received the consideration in the presence of the Registrar and also signed an endorsement to that effect. Under sub-section (2) of S.5