Wadsworth, J.

1. The only question arising in this appeal is one relating to the admissibility of a mortgage document, Ex. A which was put into evidence as containing a recital of a boundary which supports the plaintiffs case of title. The document was marked in the trial Court without formal proof, but with an objection to its admissibility. It was a mortgage by three brothers, namely D.W. 2, P.W. 1 and another who is alleged to be dead, though there is no evidence so far as I can find of his death. It relates to a land, in which the present parties have no interest but to a land which is situated to the west of the land which is the subject-matter of the present suit. Now it is well established that a recital of a boundary in a document between third parties is not ordinarily admissible to prove possession or title as against a person who is not a party to the document. But this rule is subject to exceptions. There is a good deal of authority for the view that such a statement when contained in a document against the proprietary interest of the person making it can be admitted under Section 32(3), Evidence Act, when the executant of the document is dead: vide Ningawa v. Bh