Krishnamoorthy J.

This Second Appeal was referred by one of us (Krishnamoorthy, J.) as an important question of limitation arises in this appeal. The question of limitation will depend upon the question as to whether one of the decree-holders in a redemption suit with executes a decree by virtue of the provisions contained in O.XXI R.15 of the Code of Civil Procedure can be equated to a redeeming co-mortgagor who redeems property de hors a decree. A learned Single Judge of this Court in S.A.No. 844 of 1979 has held that in such eases the position is the same. The matter was referred to a Bench as the learned Single Judge had his own reservations in the matter at that lime.

2. The 13th defendant in a suit for partition is the appellant. B. Schedule property forms part of A schedule. A schedule property belonged to the tarwad to plaintiffs 1 to 7 and defendants 1, 4 and 8 and others. It was outstanding on a mortgage from 1066 M.E., renewed in 1077 ME and again in 1092 ME. To redeem that mortgage the present 'plaintiffs 2 and 4 and defendants 1 and 4 and others filed O.S.No. 1274 of 1121 before ».! the Munsiff s Court, Trivandrum. A decree for redemption and recovery was pas