Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

In the circumstances, the tenant filed the Execution case seeking vacant possession of the premises measuring 30' 8" x 9' 8" as described in the schedule to the application. The landlord filed a lengthy objection to this application raising several pleas and thereafter filed I.A.No.VIII, to decide the question of maintainability of the Execution case. According to the landlord, the decree for eviction, incorporating the terms of compromise, was not executable; it was also contended that, the tenant, having failed to issue the notice under Section 27 of the Act, had no right to seek vacant possession of the new premises.

The inference is, in case, the decree for eviction under proviso (j) to Section 21(1) included any term of compromise, such term can be executed; the need to file an application arises only in case, the right sought to be executed rests solely on the statutory right under Section 28.

We are of the view that the case before us can be decided without examining the abstract proposition of law posed In Leelavathi's case. Here, there is a decree comprising within itself the terms of the compromise. What is sought to be executed, is the decree under proviso (j) to Section 21(1). Unless these terms of the decree are held invalid, they are to be held as executable.