MUSHTAQ AHMED Vs. AJUDYA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONLY one point has been raised in support of this appeal that the decree in execution whereof the appellants are being evicted is a declaratery decree hence incapable of being executed. The decree runs as follows:

(2.) IF the decree is held to be executable, then there can be no manner of doubt that remitting of rent pertaining to the years 1970, and 1971 by two money -orders on 15th and 20th June, 1972 could not constitute adequate and proper, compliance of the decree under which the payment was to be made every year and the decree -holder was well within his rights not to accept the same as an indefeasible right to evict the judgment -debtor had by then accrued in his favour. Mr. Kotwal is, therefore, right in not pressing this point in support of the appeal. We are, thus left with only one point i. e. the declaratory character of the compromise decree.

(3.) MR . Kotwal has in support of his argument relied upon a Bench decision of this court in B.K. Thapar and others Vs. Sudhir Kumar and ors. AIR 1966 J&K 13 wherein in almost similar circumstances the court had held that such a decree was merely declaratory in character and therefore,not executable. The relevant clause of the compromise decree in the said case read as under :