1. We consider that the decree in suit No. 241 of 1886 on the Mannargudi Munsif’s file was a final decree in as much as it decreed according to the last clause of Section 92 of the Transfer of Property Act that in case of default in payment within the stipulated time, the plaintiff was to be debarred of his right of redemption. Orders passed under Section 93 are in our opinion merely supplementary to the decree under Section 92, showing whether the terms of the decree have or have not been fulfilled. It is clear that in this case when the three months’ time allowed in the decree had elapsed without payment having been made, the decree became a final decree without any farther orders being required. That decree then being a final one after confirmation in appeal, the present suit being based on precisely the same cause of action as in that suit, is of course barred as res judicata.
2. The second appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.