JUDGMENT 1.Exhibit VI, mour opinion, is valueless as evidence and the omission of the learned District Judge to refer to it is wholly immaterial. 2. As regards the alleged payment to one of the heirs of the original mortgagee, the Subordinate Judge finds that the alleged payment was a sham. The District Judges judgment is obscure on that point. The Full Bench case in Mannava Annapurnamma v. Uppala Akkayya 19. Ind. Cas. 12 : 36 M. 544 : 13 M.L.T. 268 : (1913) M.W.N. 328 : 24 M.L.J. 333 only decides the the payment to one of the several joint promisees in a contract is binding on the others, and it does not decide the question whether payment to one of the several heirs of a single deceased promisee is binding on the other heirs. On the other hand, two at least of the three opinions incline against the view that such payment is binding. 3. The second appeal is dismissed with costs.