(1.) THIS petition under Article 227 of the Constitution impugns the order dated 11.5.2012 passed by Senior Civil Judge -cum -Rent Controller (South), New Delhi whereby the objections filed by the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 35 CPC were dismissed. The respondent Uma Sahai Memorial Trust filed a petition for eviction under Section 22 of the Delhi Rent Control Act (for short the 'Act') against M/s. Jain Malleables seeking its eviction from the tenanted premises C1 -A (Old No. B -11/A), Maharani Bagh, New Delhi. The eviction petition was allowed vide the judgment dated 21.4.2003 of the Addl. Rent Controller. The tenant through its proprietor K.R.Jain, the petitioner herein, filed an appeal against the said judgment. In the appeal, parties arrived at a settlement vide document Ex. C1. In terms thereof, the ground and second floor of the tenanted premises were surrendered and, as agreed, a lease was to be executed for first floor, garage, servant quarter with common passage to first floor, by the landlord in favour of the tenant for the period of five years commencing from 01.04.2007 expiring on 31.03.2012. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of as compromised in terms of the settlement and undertakings given by the parties as stipulated in Ex. C1.
(2.) THE petitioner/tenant having failed to deliver possession on the expiry of five years, the landlord had to take execution of the eviction order. The petitioner filed objections alleging that the compromise arrived at between the parties, did not amount to decree of the court and the order which was sought to be executed, was not executable. It was also alleged that he never agreed or undertook to vacate the first floor of the premises on the expiry of five years. It was further alleged that the compromise deed created fresh lease in his favour in respect of the first floor and thus, the eviction order was not executable in respect thereof.
(3.) THE aforesaid order is under challenge in the instant petition by the petitioner/objector.