K. P. MOHAPATRA, J.

( 1 ) ORDER :- Civil Revision Nos. 471 and 505 of 1985 were heard analogously. The order which is going to be passed will govern both.

( 2 ) THE facts relevant for disposal of these cases are narrated in brief. Opposite party No. 1 is the State Bank of India of Khurda. The petitioners 2 to 6 and opposite parties 2 to 4 are the partners of petitioner No. 1, M/s. Tapanga Light Foundry and Co. having its head office in Calcutta and the factory premises at Tapanga near Khurda. Opposite party No. 1 instituted T. M. S. No. 92 of 1982 (II) against the petitioners and opposite parties 2 to 4 in the court of the learned Subordinate Judge, Khurda praying for a preliminary decree for recovery of Rs. 94,06,349. 22 and for sale of mortgaged property and pledged goods on the basis of a deed of mortgage. In their written statement the plaintiffs and opposite parties 2 to 4 did not deny execution of the deed of mortgage on receipt of loans from opposite party No. 1, but, inter alia, alleged that the amount due against them was much less than the amount claimed and the suit was barred by limitation. One of the clauses in the deed of mortgage relates to pledge of goods and is to