Ramesam, J.

1. The facts of the second appeal may be stated as follows: The 1st defendant was the original owner of the suit properties which are described in Schedules A and B of the plaint. Both these sets of properties were mortgaged to Kuppuswami Pillai on the 20th June, 1910, under Ex. I. Afterwards the 1st defendant effected a second mortgage of the properties in Schedule A only and some other properties not in the suit in favour of 3rd defendants father in 1914 by Ex. E. The plaintiff obtained a mortgage decree in Small Cause No. 8 of 1926 against the 1st defendant and in execution of the decree purchased the properties in Schedule B by a sale certificate, Ex. IV, dated 6th August, 1917. Afterwards, the 2nd defendant in execution of a decree in Small Cause No. 1238 of 1914 purchased in Court auction the properties in Schedule A. In 1917 a suit was filed by the 1st mortgagee to enforce his mortgage imp-leading the 1st defendant, the plaintiff, the 2nd defendant and the 3rd defendant and obtained a decree on the 8th February, 1919: Ex. C. He applied for execution of the decree in July, 1923. The plaintiff paid off the decree amount. The plaintiff now brings the suit for