Venkatasubba Rao, J.

1. The point arises in execution. Is the plaintiff entitled to mesne profits under the decree? The learned Subordinate Judge has upheld the plaintiffs claim and the correctness of his order is called in question in this appeal.

2. A few facts may be stated. The plaintiff, who was a minor at the date of the suit, claimed her deceased husbands properties from the defendants, who were alleged to have been in unlawful possession. Her husband died in 1913 and the suit was filed in 1919. Judgment was delivered for the plaintiff on the 10th February, 1922, directing delivery of possession of certain im-moveable properties. The judgment contains a further direction which is now material. It runs thus The mesne profits will be determined by a separate inquiry in execution proceedings.

3. An appeal, A.S. No. 220 of 1922, was taken to the High Court and in 1925 the judgment of the Trial Court was confirmed subject to a slight modification, which I need not notice.

4. The plaintiff applied to the Lower Court. on 6th April, 1927 by way of execution of the decree, for mesne profits past and future; in other words, she filed an execution petition claiming those profits. T