Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.

1. The question in this second appeal is whether an application for a final decree in a mortgage suit is barred by the law of limitation. The case has been placed before a Bench as the facts are unusual and it was considered that there was no authority directly bearing on this case.

2. In O.S. No. 391 of 1935, on the file of the Court of the District Munsiff of Kulitalai, the first, second and third respondents sued to enforce the payment of a debt due on a mortgage which had been created by the grandfather of the appellant. At the time of the institution of the suit the mortgagor was dead, and his son and his two grandsons, of whom the appellant is one, were made defendants in his place. There were six other defendants. These persons were made parties as they had interests in the property by reason of subsequent mortgages. On the 30th September, 1936, the District Munsiff passed a preliminary mortgage decree, -in which he directed that two months time should be allowed for redemption. The defendants did not appear and therefore a decree was passed ex parte. On the 20th October, the first defendant (the father of the appellant) applied for an o