BHAIRO PRASAD Vs. PRADEEP KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an execution Second Appeal by the decree-holder against whom the Courts below have found that the decree based on compromise was not executable since it created a new lease in favour of the defendant judgment-debtor.

(2.) The only question that has been canvassed before me in the appeal is that on a true interpretation of the compromise constituting part of the decree, a new lease was neither intended to be created nor one was created and as such it did not suffer for want of registration. Sri R.N. Singh appearing for the appellant has distinguished the Supreme Court decision relied upon by the two Courts below in the light of subsequent decisions of the Supreme Court and also the legal position as interpreted by this High Court.

(3.) Before entering into the legal aspect it would be relevant to have the facts and the compromise which is subject of interpretation here. The appellant filed a suit for ejectment and for recovery of arrears of rent and mesne profits etc. against the respondent which was later on compromised and the compromise petition was made part of the decree. The relevant portion of the compromise is extracted below :