- (1.) THIS is an appeal under Section 18(1) of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 17 -8 -1961. in an execution second appeal. It raises a question about the executability of a compromise decree between a landlord and a tenant the facts necessary for appreciating the controversy are briefly these:
(2.) THE appellants before us were the decree -holders. They had filed a suit against the respondent -judgment -debtor for arrears of rent and for eviction of the respondent from a shop at Nagaur which had been taken by the judgment -debtor from the decree -holders on a monthly rent of Rs. 25. It was claimed that 14 months rent was due and that the decree -holders were entitled to evict Hukumchand. The suit was decreed on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the parties. As the question of execulability of the decree falls to be considered on the terms of the compromise, the salient features of the compromise are stated hereunder:
(3.) THE compromise slates that the parties have agreed to compromise the suit on the terms mentioned therein. The first clause states that each of the parties shall bear half of the costs. Clause 2 states that the defendant had paid Rs. 280 on that date and upto 1 -10 -1957 Rs. 370 were due and to this was to be added half of the costs of the suit which the defendant undertook to pay by six monthly instalments of Rs. 150 each and the instalments were to be paid till the arrears were cleared. Clause 3 provided that from 1 -10 -1957. the defendant shall pay Rs. 25 per month as rent of the shop and this he shall pay on the first of every month. Clause 4 laid down that in case of non -compliance of Clauses 2 and 8 by the defendant, the plaintiff was to be entitled to set the defendant evicted from the shop. Clause 5 provided that whatever payments shall be made would be evidenced by receipts and no payment shall be acceptable without a receipt. In the end it was prayed that a decree for compromise be given. This compromise was dated 21 -10 -1957. The court decreed the suit in terms of the compromise. As the judgment -debtor did not pay the monthly rent for about two months, the decree -holder filed the execution application on 7 -1 -1958. The application was registered on 16 -1 -1958. On 25 -1 -1958. The judgment -debtor made an application in court the he was paying Rs. 250 and costs and the sam be deposited. The court asked the decree -holder on 25 -1 -1958. If he would accept this amount but as the decree -holder was not willing to accept this amount the judgment -debtor was directed to deposit it later on as on that day the Treasury was closed by the lime the case could be taken up by the court. On 29 -1 -1958 the judgment -debtor paid the amount in court The judgment -debtor then objected to the execution of the decree on the ground that the same was not executable He also contended that he was entitled to the protection of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950. hereinafter to be referred as the "Act", and urged that the agreement which resulted in compromise was not valid being opposed to public policy in that it tended to deprive him of the protection afforded by law. The Execution Court (Civil Judge) over -ruled the objection and held that the decree was executable.;