Ramesam, J.

1. The second appeal arises out of a suit for redemption of an otti. Various defences were raised and were made the subject of issues. The 4th issue was "Is the suit for partial redemption sustainable." The contention of the defendants was that there was another item which was the subject of otti and that also ought to have been made the subject of the suit. The District Munsif found that that item had been sold in Court auction as early as 1894 and was being held by strangers. He said:

There is thus nothing to redeem so far as that item is concerned. It is, therefore, apparent, as urged by the plaintiffs, that the 2nd item was included in Ex. A simply in order to get the document registered in the Payoli Sub-Registrar s Office and for no other purpose and the parties also understood it in that light.

2. He found the issue for the plaintiff. On appeal the District Judge states in para. 2 of his judgment:

The preliminary point for determination in this appeal is whether the otti, Ex. A, sought to be redeemed is invalid.

3. He found Ex. A invalid and dismissed the plaintiffs suit.

4. In the first place, there is no issue in the case as to whether Ex. A was invalid, and