1. The respondent, plaintiff, seeks to enforce a mortgage executed in his favour on the 15th December 1891. The sum of Rs 1,150 part of the sum advanced by him was, it is found, advanced and actually paid for the amount due under a decree dated the 20th March 1890, obtained by one Subba Reddi on a mortgage in his favour executed in the year 1887. The appellant was the holder of an intermediate incumbrance, dated the 4th February 1890 upon which also a decree was obtained on the 4th November 1890. Prior to the date of the respondents mortgage, there were, therefore, two mortgage decrees in existence, the earlier one in favour of Subba Reddi, the later in favour of the appellant. It is found as a fact that the respondent, when advancing Rs. 1,150 for the discharge of the earlier decree, intended to keep alive the prior incumbrance, and it has been held that he is to that extent entitled to priority as against the appellant whose incumbrance is intermediate in point of time.

2. On the hearing of the appeal, it was argued before us that inasmuch as Subba Reddis mortgage had become merged in the decree passed upon it and that decree had been satisfied, the intention of keeping it