1. This Civil Revision Petition is by the defendant in a suit for redemption of a mortgage and recovery of possession of property with arrears of purapad. Defendants 3 to 5 had a contention that the transaction on the basis of which recovery of possession was sought was a kanam as defined in the Malabar Tenancy Act, 14 of 1930, and additional issue No. 10 was in these terms.

"Is the plaint transaction a mortgage or a tenancy."

The trial court repelled the defence contention and held that it was a mortgage. The correctness of this finding is canvassed in this revision petition.

2. The transaction in question is evidenced by a Kaivasampanaya deed (RRWvwkepLiLgU) executed on 22-1-1898 by the plaintiff's ancestor in favour of Cheeramma, mother of defendants 1 and 2, for a sum of Rs. 300/- and a panaya kychit (Ext. A-1) executed by the latter on the same date. Cheeramma was to appropriate Rs. 18/- towards interest on Rs. 300/-, adjust Rs. 4-7-7 towards revenue and Rs. 20-8-5 for putting up fences and thatching the building etc. and out of the surplus of profits she was to pay Rs. 32/-as purapad and Re. 1/- as the cost of two bunches of plantains. Interest on arrears of purapad