This Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal raises an interesting question of law bearing on the provisions of Order 34, rule 14, Civil Procedure Code. The following are the circumstances giving rise to this question. The appellants executed a usufructuary mortgage in favour of one Kodotha Ambu Nair on 7th September, 1916 to secure a sum of Rs. 12,500. This mortgage amount was made up of Rs. 8,000 due in respect of an earlier mortgage in favour of the same mortgagee, Rs. 2,000 being the sum in respect of a mortgage deed executed in favour of the mortgagee’s elder brother, Rs. 1,874 being the arrears of rent due under a lease back in respect of the earlier mortgage and the balance being the cash paid to the mortgagor for his necessities. The period of redemption fixed in the mortgage was 20 years. It was also mentioned therein that in respect of this property the mortgagor had executed a geni chit (a lease back) in favour of the mortgagee. But the geni chit was actually, executed only on the next day and this was for a period of one year. The rent stipulated under the geni chit was 772½ paras of paddy per year besides paying to the Government the assessment Rs. 166-10-0. The a