RANGARAO Vs. KAMLAKANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HERE is a case where the suit for possession filed by the landlord-appellant ended in a compromise decree. The terms of the compromise which ultimately ended in such a decree are as under :

(2.) THE date of the decree is 3.1.1985. Thereafter, what had happened is a notification exempting certain categories of buildings from the purview of C.P. and Berar Letting of House and Rent Control Order, 1949 issued under clause 30 of the said order came to be struck down on the ground that it was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. This decision was rendered on 9.6.1985. When the decree was sought to be executed, the tenant albeit the compromise raised an objection that the decree become unexecutable since the civil court had lost jurisdiction to pass an order of eviction in view of the decision. That objection was overruled by the court of first instance and the court of appeal. Thereafter, when the matter went up to the High Court, this objection of the judgment-debtor was sustained. Hence, the civil appeal.

(3.) DR . Ghatate, learned counsel for the respondent, urges that on the date of execution of the decree, the Civil Court lost the jurisdiction to pass an order of eviction. Hence the point relating to jurisdiction could be raised even during the execution stage.