- (1.) Briefly the facts of the case are that Hariraj Sarup was the owner of 6 bighas 12 biswas of land as detailed in the suit, situated in Jamna Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhari. He filed a suit for possession of the said land against Kailash Chand, now petitioner, in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Jagadhri. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court. The plaintiff went up in 1st appeal, which was dismissed. He came up in Second Appeal No. 899 of 1965 (Hari Raj Sarup and others v. Kailash Chand) to this Court.
(2.) The plaintiff also filed an application for ejectment against Kailash Chand, present petitioner, from a building bounded as:- East : Street and Shakarma colony. West : Compound of the plaintiffs. North : Hamida Colony. South : Bhagat Singh road. (Khasra No. 1175/1094) situated in Jamna Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhri. It may be mentioned that the suit for possession was with respect to the land which was situated contiguous to the building. The application was dismissed by the Rent Controller. The plaintiff went up in appeal before the Appellate Authority which was dismissed by him. He came up in revision to this Court.
(3.) During the pendency of the appeal and the revision, the parties entered into a compromise, wherein it was agreed that the petitioner would be a tenant on the property shown by letters X-1, X-2, X-3 and X-4 on the plan annexed with the Regular Second Appeal, for a period of 10 years at a rent of Rs. 15/- per month. The land outside that area would not form part of his tenancy and the petitioner would be liable to give immediate possession thereof. It was further agreed that the petitioner would be entitled to put up additional construction in the area under his tenancy subject to the municipal bye-laws but after the termination of the tenancy, he would not be entitled to claim compensation for those structures. He will however be entitled to remove the material within a period of 3 months of the termination of the tenancy. The landlord, now respondent, it was further agreed, would have no objection if whole or part of that property would be rented out of K. Iron Works Private limited or for the use of Kailash Chand and his sons. The petitioner would have the option to buy that property within a period of one year at the price to be settled mutually or through an agreed arbitrator failing which through the arbitration of Mr. S.C. Mittal, District Judge, Karnal (now an Hon'ble Judge of this Court). In view of the aforesaid compromise, a decree was passed in the Regular Second Appeal on November 8, 1966. The revision against the order in the application for ejectment was dismissed as having become infructuous.;