This Second Appeal raises a question of competing title as between the alienees from the last maleholder Ramaswami’s widow, Seshamma, the appellants before me, and the contesting defendants in the Court of trial on the one hand and the settles from her mother-in-law, Ramamma, on the other, of whom the plaintiff in the trial Court, the first respondent before me, is the last surviving brother. It was the primary part of the plaintiff’s case in the plaint that there was a usufructuary mortgage by the plaintiff and his deceased brothers in about 1935 in respect of the suit properties in favour of the first defendant which became discharged before the date of suit, and that the first defendant was not entitled to remain in possession. It may be noted that this part of the plaintiff’s case was put forward as accounting for the defendant’s admitted possession for some years prior to suit. It was his further case that the first defendant got Seshamma, the sixth defendant, after her mother-in-law’s death to alienate the suit properties to defendants 2 and 4 clandestinely, under Exhibits D-1 and D-2, dated 23rd March, 1944, to the prejudice of the plaintiff who, along with his brothe