JUDGMENT

Ryves, J. - In this appeal two important and difficulty points of law arise, and, our attention has been drawn to a number of decisions of the various High Courts in India, more or less relevant. I think, however, that we are bound by two Full Bench decisions of this Court, and, therefore, need not consider nor discuss any other cases.

2. The facts are as follows, so far as they are relevant:The father of the present plaintiffs, brought a suit in 1905 in the court of the Munsif of Ghaziabad to redeem the simple mortgage now in suit, and obtained a decree for redemption on payment of Rs. 2,647-11-2 within six months of the date of the decree. The decree went on to say, "otherwise the suit, will be considered dismissed."

3. The money was not paid and the defendants recovered their costs. Nothing further was done until the present plaintiffs brought this suit in the court of the Subordinate Judge of Meerut to redeem the same mortgage on payment of Rs. 2,647-11-2 (as found due in the previous suit). The defendants to this suit were defendants in the previous suit or their transferees.

4. Two main defences were raised: ILR (1921) All. 638 that this suit was barred by the rule of re