BAIJNATH MORE AGARWALLA AND ORS. Vs. TIKARAM CHAND BHAJANKA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal from the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Lower Assam Districts at Gauhati in Title Execution Case No. 8 of 1958.

(2.) THE material facts are that the appellants obtained a compromise decree against the respondents in Title Suit No. 26 of 1956 and the compromise decree was arrived at on the 11th April 1957 on the basis of the terms of compromise filed by the parties, namely defendants 1 and 2 and the plaintiffs in the court. The material terms were plaintiffs in the suit would be decreed against defendants No. 1 and 2 for a total amount of Rs. 6,300/ - inclusive of all arrear rent for a particular house which the defendants possessed as tenants of the Plaintiffs. In the terms of the compromise it was shown how the kists were to be paid and the default -clause (paragraph 5 of those terms) was in the following words:

(3.) THE learned Subordinate Judge in the order under appeal held that there was an arrear of Rs. 3,500/ - out of the decretal amount and that the judgment -debtors' were not liable, to be evicted because a new tenancy was created in favour of the judgment -debtors by virtue of their receiving rent at the rate of Rs. 215/ - per month from them for a period of seven months for the year 2014 Sambat. In the opinion of the learned Judge this new tenancy unless terminated, was a bar to the delivery of possession of the suit premises to the decree -holders even though there was default in the payment of kist as incorporated in the compromise decree.