G. C. DAS, J.

( 1 ) THE two principal questions to be decided in this appeal are (1) The applicability of Section 135 of the Indian Contract Act (Act IX of 1872) to a case of surety within the meaning of Section 145 of the Code of Civil Procedure; and (2) Whether the subsequent objection in the same Misc. case is hit by the principles of res judicata on the ground that the second objection was not included in the 1st objection.

( 2 ) THEY arise under the following circumstances; Respondent 1 Halima Bibi, grandmother of respondent 2 Md. Yusuf Ahamad who was the original defendant in Title suit No. 52/50 stood surety for the performance of any decree that may eventually be passed in the aforesaid suit. The plaintiff, Bankim Bihari Roy filed the aforementioned suit for ejectment and damage in lieu of shop rent. In the said suit, the plaintiff filed an application for attachment before judgment of movables belonging to the defendant under Order 38, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Respondent No. 1 in that proceeding furnished security to the extent of Rs. 2000/for the satisfaction of the decree that might be passed in the suit. Accordingly halim Bibi executed a registered secur