Madhavan Nair, J.

1. The purchaser from the plaintiff who was made a supplemental respondent in the lower appellate Court is the appellant in this second appeal.

2. The facts of the case are stated clearly in the judgments of the Courts below and need not be re-stated in detail. For the purposes of this second appeal which raises only one point, the only facts relevant are these : The plaintiff sued for contribution from the third item of the property, the owner of which is the second defendant who had purchased it from the first defendant. Items 1 and 2, along with the third and some other items, were subject to a first mortgage. Some of these items were subject to a second mortgage also. We are not concerned with the second mortgage or with items other than items 1, 2 and 3 in this second appeal. Plaintiffs father became the purchaser of items 1 and 2 in execution of a small cause decree in S.C. No. 84 of 1902 and after him the plaintiff came into possession of the same. The first defendant had become the owner of the third item and had sold it to the second defendant. The first mortgagees son filed O.S. No. 54 of 1910 in the Ellore Sub-Court impleading the first defendant