Wadsworth, J.

1. The plaintiff prays for a declaration that the mortgage dated 6th July, 1925, executed by one Rajammal in favour of the deceased husband of the first defendant is of no effect as against the plaintiff as reversioner to the estate of the deceased Papathi Ammal, mother of Rajammal, and cannot convey rights beyond the life time of Rajammal. There is also a prayer, for an injunction which is not now pressed.

2. The second defendant supports the plaintiff.

3. The first defendant contends that Rajammal was the absolute owner of the suit house and that the plaintiff is not entitled to claim the suit property as a reversioner in the event of her death.

4. The evidence in the case is somewhat scanty, but it raises certain interesting questions with reference to the devolution of property in the dancing girl caste. On the materials before me the following facts seem to be established. One Papathi Animal who died many years ago had two daughters, Rajammal and the second defendant. It must, I think, be taken as proved that they belonged to the dancing girl caste. Papathi Ammal appears to have married and been widowed. She then came to Madras, became the concubine of a gold