RAGHUNATH HARI DESHPANDE Vs. KASHINATH RAMCHANDRA DESHPANDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a second appeal arising from execution proceedings of a consent decree passed on 7th of November 1946. By that compromise decree the parties agreed that the respondent was to remain in possession until the period of a lease with regard to Which there was a dispute between the parties in the suit. At the end of this period on the 18th of January 1953 the plaintiff decree-holder was entitled to obtain possession of the land from the defendant. If the defendant did not hand over possession by the 18th of January 1953 the plaintiff was entitled to make an application for execution and obtain possession.

(2.) THE defendant failed to hand over possession by the 18th of January 1953 and therefore on the 17th March 1953 the plaintiff appellant made the application for execution from which the present appeal arises for possession of the land. The respondent then met him with a contention that the lower Court had no jurisdiction to give him possession of this land because of the provisions apparently of Section 29 and Section 85 (1) of the Tenancy Act or either. The appellant contended that Section 85 (2) applied and nothing in these two sections would affect the appellant's right to obtain possession of the land in execution of the decree. This contention has been overruled and he has come in second appeal.

(3.) NOW, it is quite clear that if the provisions of Section 89 (2) do not apply Section 29 and Section 85 (1) would have had application. Section 89 (2) provides :