Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.

1. The question of the appeal is whether the appellant possesses a right of set-off by virtue of Section 49 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The section says that a transferee of a decree shall hold it subject to the ewities which the judgment-debtor might have enforced against the original decree-holder.

2. In O. S No. 556 of 1920 on the file of the Court of the District Munsiff of Razole, the plaintiff, one Mylavarapu Venkataratnam, obtained a money decree against the appellant. In excution of it the decree-holder attached certain immovable purchased the properties. Thereupon the appellant applied to the Court under Order 21, Rule 90 for an order setting aside the sale. His application was dismissed; but on appeal the sale was set aside. This was on the 30th January, 1930. The 15th September, 1933. It was then manifest that the appellant was entitled to be placed in possession of the properties with mesne profits from the date on which he had been dispossessed by the decree-holder. The decree-holder died and on the 4th Febrary, 1934, hislegal representatives transferred the decree to the respondent. On the 9th January, 1936, the appellant file