1. There is no substance in this appeal. The appellant obtained a decree declaring that he was the owner of certain immovable properties. These were in the possession of a Receiver and on the decree being passed the Receiver put him in possession. The decree also directed that the defendant should pay by way of costs the sum of its. 926-13-0. An application was filed for the execution of this part of the decree and it was contended by the appellant that he was entitled to have as the fee allowed to his pleader for the execution petition a sum of Rs. 212-8-0 being one-fourth of Rs. 850 which was the amount allowed for the pleader's fee in the suit. The Subordinate Judge held that Under Rule 34 he was only entitled to one-fourth of the fee allowable on Rs. 926-13-0. Under Rule 31(2) that fee was Rs. 46-8-0, and one-fourth came to Rs. 11-10-0. This decision was upheld by Kuppuswami Ayyar J. and the appellant has now appealed Under Clause 15, Letters Patent. Rule 34 of the Rules relating to the legal practitioners states that the fee for practitioners appearing in execution petitions in small cause or original suits shall be one-fourth of the fee allowable on the amount or value of the relief granted by the decree as calculated Under Rule 31(1) and (2), irrespective of the number of execution petitions. By the decree the plaintiff was granted two reliefs. The first was that the Receiver who was in possession of the properties should put the plaintiff in possession. The second was that Defendant 1 should pay the plaintiff rupees 926-13-0 for the costs of the suit and bear his own amounting to Rs. 155-12-0. The execution petition was filed to enforce this second relief and Under Rule 34 the fee allowable was one-fourth of the fee allowable on Rs. 926-13-0. The appeal is dismissed with costs.