Dayal, J.

1. These two appeals by the son of the decree-holder arise out of the same judgment. They have been heard together and this judgment will govern them both. The material facts are these:

2. Rai Bahadur Dalip Narain Singh obtained a 6nal mortgage decree against Chaudhary Raj Rajeshwar Prasad Singh and several other persons on the 27th o£ September 1950. On the 6th January 1951, the said Rai Bahadur Dalip Narain Singh died. On the 3rd August 1951, his son, the present appellant, applied for the execution of the decree in mortgage Execution Case No. 36 of 1951, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Begusarai. One of the judgment-debtors, namely, Chaudhary Lala Prasad Singh, objected to the execution under Sec. 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure mainly on the grounds (1) that as Rai Bahadur Dalip Narain Singh had executed a Will in favour of Deoniti Prasad Singh, he alone was entitled to execute the decree and not the present appellant and (2) that, in the absence of a succession certificate, it was not open to the appellant to obtain execution of the decree passed in favour of his deceased father. A Miscellaneous Case No. 41 of 1951 was started thereon.

3. Rai Bahadur