Spencer, J.

1. These are two suits upon mortgage documents executed by 1st defendant, whose sons are defendants 2 to 5. The appellant is a transferee from the 1st mortgagee, the plaintiff in O.S. No. 40 of 1918 and the 6th defendant in O.S. No. 43 of 1915, which is the 2nd mortgagees suit. The 3rd mortgigee is the 7th defendant in both suits.

2. The District judge dismissed O.S. No. 40 of 1918, holding that the mortgage deeds were not properly attested and therefore invalid I think he was right in preferring the evidence of the two witnesses whose names appear on the documents as attestors when they say that the executant did not sign in their presence to the evidence of the executant and the sister and the daughter of one mortgagee, the daughter being herself a mortgagee under one of the deeds, as the latter are likely to be interested in keeping the property in the hands of relations rather than allowing it to pass into the possession of the 2nd and 3rd mortgagees who are strangers.

3. No doubt the 5th plaintiffs witness who is a pleader practising at Bellary is related to the executant and Parikshita Rao the other signatory who is now dead was a friend of the executant and