Judgement

FAZL ALI, J. : These appeals arise out of an execution proceeding, and the main point to be decided in them is what is the effect of certain provisions of the Madras Agriculturists Relief Act (Madras Act 4 of 1938, which will hereinafter be referred to as "the Madras Act-"), on the rights of the parties. How this point arises will be clear from a brief statement of the facts of the case.

2. It appears that in 1908, one Veeresalingam, the husband of the first respondent, borrowed a sum of Rs. 9,000/- from one Sitharamayye and executed a mortgage bond in his favour. Subsequently a suit was instituted by the mortgagee to enforce the mortgage and a final decree in that suit was passed on 19-8-1926. Thereafter, on 28-10-1931, the decree-holder applied for the execution of the decree by the sale of the mortgaged property.

In 1933, the decree-holder transferred tile decree to one Sobhanadri, after whose death his son, the appellant before us, was brought on the record as his legal representative in the execution proceedings. Several years before the assignment of the decree, Veeresalingam, the defendant, was therefore brought on the record as his legal re presentative. On 6-7-193