1937   Present: Soertsz J. and Fernando A.J.

SAVARIMUTTU v. ANNAMAH.

 128-D. C. Colombo, 4,138.

Prescription-Mortgage action--Thediathetam property mortgaged by husband -Decree against husband's administrator-Subsequent action against widow-Ordinance No. 22 of 1871, s. 6-Mortgage Ordinance, No. 21 Of 1927, s. 16 (I).

B a Jaffna Tamil, subject to the Thesawalamai mortgaged thediathetam property. After his death the mortgage bond was put in suit against his administrator and decree entered in favour of the mortgagee.

The present action was instituted against the widow of B to make her half share of the property bound and executable under the decree.

Held, that although section 16 (1) of the Mortgage Ordinance permitted a second action to be brought, the action must be brought within the period of limitation created by section 6 of the Prescription Ordinance.

Kadappa Chettiar v. Ramanayake (38 N. L. R. 33) and Ambalavanar v. Kurunathan (37 N. L. R. 286) followed.

BY mortgage bond No. 38 dated October 3, 1925, A. Bastianpillai hypothecated a house and premises in Colpetty. Bastianpillai was a Jaffna Tamil subject to the Thesawalamai and t