Cornish, J.

1. The petitioner in this Civil Revision Petition is the judgment-debtor in a suit, S.C. No. 563 of 1933. The decree-holder in that suit was judgment-debtor of the present petitioner in another suit, Section C. No. 1112 of 1923. The decree-holder in the first of these suits transferred his decree to the present respondent on 5th July 1933. But on 17th August 1933 the petitioner and the decree-holder, apparently without the knowledge or consent of the transferee, made an adjustment of the decrees which they had obtained against one another. This adjustment was duly certified to the Court. An agreement was drawn up between the petitioner and the transferor which recited that the decree in Section C. No. 563 of 1933 had been transferred, and that as this transfer had not been recognized, the transferor "should file full satisfaction memo for the present". When, one year later, the transferee applied under Order 21, Rule 16 for execution of the decree in S.C. No. 563 of 1933, he was met with the objection of the judgment-debtor that the decree had been adjusted. The question is whether in the circumstances the objection can prevail. I think it must. The lower Court in c