JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal by the defendants against a decision of the Additional District Judge affirming a decision of the Subordinate Judge. The respondent in the present appeal sometime ago, instituted a suit for declaration of his title to, and for possession of, the land included in the present execution case. Now the suit was compromised and a decree was passed and the present appellants took out execution in respect of that decree and certain plots were seized. The present respondent made an objection but on the 11th December 1915 when the objection was brought on, apparently what happened was that the present respondent said that he would rot proceed with the case. We cannot find that there was any decision with regard to the objection or any actual determination on the point.

2. Three questions are urged before us on behalf of the appellants, firstly, it is stated that these proceedings are barred as the matter is res judicata by reason of the dismissal of the respondent's objection on the 11th December 1915. We think this point is not well founded having regard to the fact that there was no decision with regard to the objection and no actual determination thereon. Secon