1. The only question involved in this appeal is whether the application for execution of the decree in O. S. No. 92 of 1949, on the file of the Sub-Court Tuticorin is barred by limitation. The suit was laid against the respondent and his wife Arunachalathammal as the second defendant for recovery of certain monies due on dealings, which the appellant had with the former. Arunachalathammal was impleaded as a guarantor. On 24/11/1951, the Subordinate Judge, Tuticorin, Passed a decree for a sum of Rs.34,479-6-2 and costs, against the appellant dismissing the suit against Arunachalathammal with costs.
As no statement of costs was filed tin behalf of Arunachalathammal, those costs were not taxed. Nevertheless, the appellant filed A. S. No. 940 of 1952 in this court, challenging the validity of the decree in so far as it directed costs to be Paid by the appellant to Arunachalathammal. That appeal was dismissed on 14/11/1956. In the meanwhile, the appellant had applied on 31/08/1954