JUDGMENT 1. This is an appeal from an order of the District Judge affirming the order of the Munsif in an execution case. The decree-holder seeks to execute a rent decree more than 3 years after the date of the decree, relying on the provisions of sec. 19 of the Limitation Act and on an acknowledgment of the debt contained in a petition, Ex. 1, which is not denied to have been executed by the judgment-debtor. The judgment-debtor Appellant relies on sec. 184 (1) of the Tenancy Act, and on sec. 6 of the Limitation Act. The decree holder Respondent cites the provisions of see 185 (2) of the Tenancy Act which clearly make the provisions of sec. 19 of the Limitation Act applicable to the execution of rent decrees. But it is argued that to allow the decree-holder a fresh starting point for limitation for the execution of a rent decree is to affect or alter the period of limitation prescribed by Art. 6, Sch. III of the Bengal Tenancy Act. The answer to this would seem to be that the acknowledgment under sec. 19 does not affect or alter the period of limitation so prescribed, though it may seem practically to do so, but only gives the decree-holder a fresh starting point for counting the period prescribed by Art. 6 of Sch. III of the Bengal Tenancy Act, which the judgment-debtor has himself given him by the petition containing the acknowledgment of his debt. We, therefore, consider that the order of the lower Court is right and we dismiss the appeal with costs which we assess at 3 gold mohurs.