JUDGMENT : Stanley, J.:— The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was brought by the plaintiff-appellant for possession of a 5 biswa share of village Kharpur and three other villages. An alternative claim was advanced to the effect that if the Court should be of opinion that the defendant-respondent, Abdul Rahim still had a right of redemption, he should be given an opportunity of redeeming the shares in question by payment of a proportionate amount of the money due to the plaintiff on foot of a mortgage which had been executed in his favour, Also there was a claim for any other relief which under the circumstances might be deemed proper by the Court. By a mortgage-deed of the 7th of November, 1888, Musammat Khatun Fatima and Muhammad Abdul Rashid Khan mortgaged a 15 biswa share in each of the four villages in question in favour of the plaintiff-appellant to secure a principal sum of Rs. 12,000. We are informed that this 15 biswas share of the four villages represented the entire interest of the mortgagors. On the 20th July, 1891, the defendant-respondent, Abdul Rahim, sold under a simple money decree which had been obtained by him against the mortgagors a 5 biswa share of each of the four villages and purchased these shares himself. On the 6th of October, 1893, the plaintiff-appellant instituted a suit for sale of the mortgaged property under his mortgage and impleaded not merely the mortgagors but also Abdul Rahim. He obtained a decree for sale on the 13th of December, 1893, and on the 6th July, 1894, the decree was made absolute, and the 20th of February, 1895, was fixed for sale of the property. 2. It appears that the mortgagors thereupon obtained a certificate from the Court under section 305 of the Code of Civil Procedure purporting to enable them to sell the property out of Court, and they thereupon sold the entire 15 biswa share to the plaintiff in consideration of the full amount of his decree and a certain sum for stamps, in Rs. 16,000. The defendant-respondent was no party to these proceedings, and consequently was not bound by them, The plaintiff upon this sale out of Court being carried out, certified to the Court on the 19th of February, 1895, the discharge of his debt under section 258. 3. 16,000. The defendant-respondent was no party to these proceedings, and consequently was not bound by them, The plaintiff upon this sale out of Court being carried out, certified to the Court on the 19th of February, 1895, the discharge of his debt under section 258. 3. When mutation of names was applied for by the plaintiff, purchaser, the defendant-respondent, Abdul Rahim, objected to the mutation of names in respect of the 5 biswas in each village which had been purchased by him. This objection was ultimately allowed by the Board of Revenue, which directed that the name of Abdul Rahim should remain recorded in respect of these 5 biswas shares. Thereupon the plaintiff-appellant applied for execution of his one-third decree as against the 5 biswas so remaining recorded in the name of Abdul Rahim, but his application was rejected on the ground that his decree had been satisfied. Hence the present suit was instituted. 4. We thought it necessary when the appeal originally came before us, having regard to the nature of the plaintiff's claim that the mortgagors or their legal representatives should be brought upon the record so that they might be bound by any order we should think fit to make. This has been done, and they are now parties to the appeal, though they are not represented before us. It appears to us that under the circumstances, the plaintiff-appellant is clearly entitled to contribution to the extent of one-third of his decree as against the defendants-respondents and to interest upon the one-third of the decree up to the date of payment. The decree has been satisfied out of the sale of the 15 biswas share which took place on the 23rd of January, 1895; but inasmuch as Abdul Rahim did not concur in that sale, the 5 biswas share which was purchased by him is not affected by the sale. Consequently the entire debt has been satisfied out of the remaining shares. This being so, the mortgagors, who satisfied the entire debt by that sale, would have a right to contribution under section 82 of the Transfer of Property. Act against Abdul Rahim, the purchaser of the 5 biswas share, that is, to a right to a sum of Rs. Consequently the entire debt has been satisfied out of the remaining shares. This being so, the mortgagors, who satisfied the entire debt by that sale, would have a right to contribution under section 82 of the Transfer of Property. Act against Abdul Rahim, the purchaser of the 5 biswas share, that is, to a right to a sum of Rs. 5,193-I-0 under section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act, the right which the mortgagors had under the mortgage devolved upon the plaintiff, and he is now entitled to recover contribution. We therefore must allow the appeal, set aside the decree of the Court below, and give a decree to the plaintiff for the sum of Rs. 5,193-I-0, with interest, at the rate of Rs. 6 per cent, per annum from the 19th of February, 1895, up to the date of payment. The interest will be calculated in the office. We give the defendants up to the 15th of November next within which to pay the principal amount with interest to be calculated up to that date, and direct that in default of payment the property or a competent part thereof be sold and the proceeds applied in satisfaction of the amount due to the plaintiff-appellant. We think that the parties should respectively abide their own costs of appeal. We so order.