P.N.Goel, J. - (1.) This is a defendants appeal arising under the circumstances mentioned hereinafter.
(2.) The dispute relates to 4 plots of village Suichak and 2 plots of village Hirdaipur in district Varanasi. It is undisputed that there is grove in all these plots which adjoin each other. For the purpose of this appeal it is also undisputed that Bechu Lal, ancestor of the respondents was tenant of these plots. About 30 years before the filing of the present suit in tire year 1960, he had planted grove in the plots. In this way Bechu Lal was grove-holder under Section 196 of the Agra Tenancy Act, 1926. At the instance of the appellant Raja there took place proceedings under Section 145 Cr. P. C. between the parties. In these proceedings a compromise was arrived at on 21-10-1954, Ex. 8. The terms of this compromise are: (1) The respondents are and would remain the tenants of the disputed property. (2) The appellant would look after the trees. In case he committed any default in the supervision of the trees, the respondents would be entitled to lake possession immediately. (3) The appellant is and would remain the owner of the fruits of the trees. He would pluck the fruits and sell them. He will pay Rs. 300.00 p.a. to the respondents and obtain a receipt therefor. Every year he will further give 600 mangoes and one maund and 10 seers Kathal to-the respondents. (4) In case the appellant committed default in paying Rs. 300.00 or mangoes or Kathals, the respondents would be entitled to take possession of the suit property. The appellant and his heirs would have no right to interfere. (5) So long as the appellant continued to pay Rs. 300.00 the respondents will have no right to take possession or to settle the property with anybody-else. (6) A sum of Rs. 160.00 is outstanding in favour of Satya Narain, the appellant will pay him at the time of the season of the fruits. (7) The parties shall bear their own costs.
(3.) At the end of the compromise the number of the disputed plots are given.;