Kuppuswami Ayyar, J.

1. The only point for consideration is whether the suit land is an inam land granted for service in a temple and as such not alienable. The appellant is the defendant and the appeal arises out of a suit for enforcing a mortgage deed executed by his father in respect of the plaint mentioned property. The appellants case was that the land was given to one of his ancestors as a service inam for rendering service in the Vishnu, Siva and Pillayar temples, the service being Vyravi service, that is to say purchasing articles, etc., for the use of the temples and cooking pongal in the Pillayar temple. The appellant examined himself and a cousin of his who is also enjoying another portion of the land rendering similar service. Ex. I an old cadjan document was filed as evidencing the grant. The first Court presumed under Section 90 of the Indian Evidence Act the document to be a genuine document as an ancient document of 1852, and the evidence of the witnesses showed that there was a service grant and the defendants family were in enjoyment. The learned Subordinate Judge was of the opinion that the document which purported to be one executed in the year Parithapi