D.K. Mahajan, J. - (1.) THIS second appeal is directed against the concurrent decisions of the Courts below passing final decree for redemption. The facts are that a suit was filed on the 30th December, 1957, for redemption of a mortgage dated the 30th January, 1899. During the pendency of the suit, a compromise was entered into whereby the mortgage money was fixed at Rs. 575/ - and it was to be paid by a certain date, that is, the 6th July, 1959, and the parties agreed that the preliminary decree be passed. Accordingly, a preliminary decree in terms of the compromise was passed. However, the promised payment was not made on the 6th July 1959, but was made on the 25th November, 1959. In the meantime an application had been made for extension of time to make the deposit as well as for final decree on the 12th November, 1959. The application for extension of the time was rejected, but the decree was made final. Against this decision, the mortgagee took up an appeal to the lower appellate Court and his contention was that as there was default in making the deposit of the mortgage money by the 6th July, 1959, no final decree could be passed. This contention was negatived by the lower appellate Court on the basis of certain decisions relied on by him. However, there is a direct decision of the Madras High Court in Angammal v. V.K. Muhammad Sulaiman Lebbai : A.I.R. 1946 Mad. 38, with which I am in respectful agreement and it concludes the matter. Once a preliminary decree is passed, the mortgagor can deposit the mortgage money fixed by the preliminary decree at any time and obtain a final decree. That being so, it cannot be said that the Courts below were in error in passing the final decree. For the reasons given above, this appeal fails and is dismissed, but there will be no order as to costs.;