Madhavan Nair, J.

1. These are two connected appeals. The plaintiff is the same in the two suits out of which these appeals arise. The first defendant in the two suits are brothers. They had another brother. Each of these three brothers executed a hypothecation bond for Rs. 3,000 in favour of one, Usain Ali Rowther. The hypothecation bonds involved in these two suits are Exhibits A and B--two of the three hypothecation bonds. The mortgagee, Usain Ali, sub-mortgaged his mortgage rights under the three mortgages in favour of the fifth defendant, a Chetti firm under Ex. C. The sub-mortgage was for an amount not exceeding Rs. 9,000 that may be borrowed from the firm. The Chetti firm instituted O.S. No. 34 of 1921, a suit for the sale of the hypothecated properties, in exercise of its rights. The present plaintiffs predecessor, Usain Ali, was the first defendant in the suit, and the mortgagors were defendants 3 and 4. It was found in that suit that the mortgages and sub-mortgages were subsisting, and a decree was passed in favour of the plaintiff therein, for the amount sued for. In that suit, the mortgagee as well as the mortgagors, were ex parte. That decree was not executed by