JUDGMENT 1. These two appeals arise out of two applications for execution of a final decree in a partition suit. The objection of the Appellant to the execution of the decree is that it is barred by limitation under Art. 182 of the Indian Limitation Act. The learned Subordinate Judge has overruled this objection. The only point for determination therefore in these two appeals is whether the execution of the decree is barred by limitation under Art. 182 of the Indian Limitation Act. Under this article an application for execution of a decree is to be made within three years from the date of the decree or where a certified copy of the decree has been registered, within six years from the date of the decree. In other words if the copy of the decree is not registered the period of limitation is three years but if it is registered the period is extended to six years. " Registered " evidently means registered in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Registration Act. The proviso to sec. 23 of this Act lays down that a copy of a decree may be presented for registration within four months from the day on which the decree was made. Evidently the words " the date on which decree was made " mean the day when the decree was signed. It is not disputed in this case that a copy of the decree under execution in this case was presented for registration and registered within four months from the day when it was signed. The decree therefore was validly registered under the provisions of the Indian Registration Act. It is not disputed that the applications for execution are within six years from the date of the decree, that is, the date on which the judgment was pronounced. The Subordinate Judge was therefore right in holding that the applications for execution are not barred by limitation. The result therefore is that these two appeals are dismissed with costs-hearing-fee being assessed at three gold mohurs in both the appeals.