Jackson, J.

1. This is an appeal against the order of the Subordinate Judge of Tellicherry, in A.S. No. 300 of 1921, on E.P. No. 55 of 1921.

2. The decree-holder relies on certain pay-merits, made within three years of the date of the prior application, in order to save limitation the lower Appellate Court has found that the payment is true and that finding is not traversed.

3. It also finds that the payment cannot save limitation and this is the point for determination.

4. The decree is dated 1915. There was an arrest in 1917. On or about 25th January, 1918, Rs. 100 (Rupees one hundred only) was paid towards the decree debt, i.e., on 10th Makaram 1093. On 17th January, 1920, the decree holder applied for execution, in B.P. No. 55 of 1921 and the Munsif took this as a petition for certifying the payment of January, 1918 and found that this payment saved limitation.

5. There are two ways in which a decree-holder may save limitation. He may prove a payment which satisfies the requirements of Section 20 of the Indian Limitation Act; or, he may prove a step-in-aid of execution, within three years of his application, as laid down in Article 182, Clause 5. If the decree-holder, when a