1. This is an appeal by the 8th defendant, whose tarwad had conducted a chitty. The present suit is an administration suit for collecting the assets of the chitty and for paying the several creditors of the chitty. A preliminary decree has also been passed and a Receiver appointed to take the necessary steps for collecting the assets and distributing the same. When the properties of the 8th defendant's tarwad were attempted to be sold in execution of the decree, the 8th defendant objected. He also filed an application under Act III of 1956 for permission to pay the debts in instalments under the provisions of that Act. Some of the counter-petitioners objected to the granting of the prayer of the 8th defendant. The main controversy was on the question as to how many of the claims against the foreman had become barred by limitation. According to the 8th defendant, the claims of the plaintiffs and also of defendants 42 and 44 were alone subsisting, while the claims of all the other creditors had become barred by limitation even before the date of the preliminary decree. The lower court took the view that after the institution of the suit, the law of limitation will not ope