Narasimham, J.

1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiffs against the concurrent decisions of the two lower courts (Munsif of Bihar Sharif and Additional Subordinate Judge of Bihar Sharif) dismissing their suit solely on the ground that it was barred by the provisions of Order 2, Rule 2, Civil Procedure Code.

2. The plaintiffs are the usufructuary mortgagees in respect of a house, the mortgagors being the two defendants who are father and son, respectively The date of the mortgage bond was the 29th October, 1949, and the period as specified in the mortgage bond was five years. It was alleged that after the execution of the mortgage bond the mortgagees were put in possession of the property hypothecated, but two days later, on the 31st October, 1949, the mortgagor-defendants were put in possession of the house as tenants of the mortgagees on the basis of a kerayanama executed in favour of the plaintiffs The defendants defaulted in payment of the stipulated rent and then the plaintiffs brought a rent Suit, No. 24 of 1956, for recovery of arrear rent, and obtained a decree in due course. It was put into execution in Execution Case No. 1560 of 1956, and sprayer was made by th