Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(10) By his award the Additional District Judge held that the owners of the land had deposited Rs. 4500.00 in terms of the decree passed on the compromise between the parties and, therefore, the decree had become "operative" on July 15, 1960. Further through that compromise Daryodh Singh was considered to have relinquished his right to share in the compensation payable on acquisition of the land under his tenancy and, therefore, not to be entitled to any share in the compensation under any of the heads of his claim. The dismissal of the application filed by landlord owners for execution of the ejectment decree, on account of the provisions of the subsequently enacted Delhi (Urban Areas) Tenants' Relief Act, 1961, was found to be of no consequence. In the result the claim of Daryodh Singh for a share in the amout of compensation was held untenable and;the compensation amount was ordered to be paid to the owners according lo the shares to which they had agreed.

Further section 4 made a provision that except as provided in section 3 no tenant of land was to be ejected from the land whether in execution of a decree or order of a court or otherwise, and if there was any proceeding for ejectment of such tenant pending immediately before the commencement of the said Act and the proceedings could not have been instituted had the Act been in force at the time of the institution of such proceeding, then, notwithstanding anything contained in any law, such proceeding was on the such commencement to abate. As the decree for the appellant's ejectment was not covered by section 3 the execution application was dismissed by the Additional Revenue Assistant on November 6, 1962. From this order dated November 6, 1962 the only inference sought to be drawn by the learned counsel for the appellant was that the appellant continued to be in possession of the land as a tenant, including the land regarding which acquisition proceedings were then pending.