JUDGMENT

Richards, J. - The facts out of which this appeal arises are somewhat peculiar. Tapasi Dube and Janki Dube obtained a joint decree for sale of certain mortgaged property. It appears that one of the decree-holders, Tapasi Dube, obtained leave to bid at the sale and he became the auction purchaser at the price of Rs. 950, which was the exact amount of the decree, that is, debt, interest and costs. He had taken the most active, if not the entire, part in the litigation which resulted in the decree in favour of himself and his co-decree-holder. He was allowed by the Court to take credit as against the purchase money for the amount of the decree, and consequently no money whatever was paid. When he applied for execution prior to his obtaining leave to bid, the application was made on behalf of himself and Janki Dube his co-decree-holder. Although there is no clear finding, it would appear that no part of the decretal money was ever paid by Tapasi Dube to Janki Dube. According to the allegations in the plaint, after the purchase Janki Dube and his successors in title remained in joint possession of the purchased property. But there is no specific finding on this point. The plaint