M. Madhavan Nair, J.

1. This appeal is against the decision of Velu Pillai, J., reported in Joseph v. John 1959 K.L.J. 725.

2. The suit property belonged to the late Thommen. Plaintiffs 1 and 2 and defendants 2 to 6 are his children. Eliswa, his widow, and Joseph, his eldest son are not parties to the suit, and in their place is impleaded the 1st defendant who had, in execution of a money decree against them, purchased the suit property and taken possession thereof on the 3rd Kanni 1112. According to the plaintiffs, that purchase bound only the share of Eliswa and Joseph but not of the plaintiffs who were no parties to the proceedings. Treating the 1st defendant as their co-sharer, the plaintiffs claim their share in the property to be divided out and given to them with past profits. The 1st defendant resists that claim on the ground, inter alia, of limitation on account of his having been in possession of the entire property in his own right as a court-auction-purchaser for 15 years before the institution of the suit in 1127 (1952). That the plaintiffs, who were co-heirs with eliswa and joseph, were no parties to the 1st defendant suit and court-purchase is not in dispute. T