Horwill, J.

1. Execution Petition No. 286 of 1936 was filed out of time; because the prior execution petition - which was unnumbered - was returned for supplying defects and no final order was passed on it. Notice went to the respondent and to the other judgment-debtors; but they did not appear and remained ex parte. In due course, on 10th October 1938, the Court passed the order "Proclaim and sell." Because of the filing of a petition under Act 4 of 1938, execution was stayed; and at a later stage an objection of limitation was taken, which was upheld. The appellant appealed; and the lower appellate Court confirmed the order of the first Court.

2. There can be no doubt, not only that an order passed in one execution petition will operate as res judicata if a similar point arises for decision in a later execution petition, but a decision made at one stage of execution operates as res judicata at a later stage. If an order to execute is passed in an execution petition, then by implication the Court has decided: (1) that the petitioner has a right to execute; (2) that the judgment-debtor is liable to satisfy the decree; (3) that the decree is executable; and (4) that it is not