Judgement

Mrs. SUJATA V. MANOHAR, J.:- The dispute relates to 3 Kathas 9 Chataks of land situated in a commercial area of Silchar in District Cachar. The land originally belonged to Surendra Nath Sen and his two other co-sharers. Under a deed of settlement dated 25-3-1939 Surendra Nath Sen gave a settlement of this land to Satindra Mohan Deb for a period of 27 years commencing from 14-4-1939 and expiring on 13-4-1965. The respondents in all these appeals are the heirs and/or successors in title of Satindra Mohan Deb (hereinafter referred to as the Debs). According to the Debs, after obtaining this settlement they built some permanent construction on a portion of this land.

2. Bibekananda Bhowal, the predecessor of the present appellants took settlement of 1 Katha 7 Chataks of land out of the total land admeasuring 3 Kathas and 9 Chataks from Satindara Mohan Deb on or about 17th of April, 1953. He claims to have constructed a single story building on the land taken under this settlement. He stated a pharmacy business in this building which is known as Bhowal Medical Hall. The business was being run by Bibekananda Bhowal with his two brothers. For the sake of convenience the heirs and/or successors-in-interest of Bibekananda Bhowal (since deceased) who are the appellants before us are hereinafter referred to as the Bhowals.

3. The Debs filed Title Suit No. 41/1956 in the Court of the Assistant District Judge, Silchar against the Bhowals for possession of 1 Katha and 7 Chataks of land and the building thereon in the occupation of the Bhowals. The Assistant District Judge decreed the suit by his judgment and order dated 13-7-59 in favour of the Debs. In appeal, however, the parties arrived at a compromise. A decree in terms of the compromise was passed by the appellant Court on 10-5-1965. The relevant terms of the compromise decree are as follows :-

"A. That the defendant-appellant will give up possession of an area of 7 x 7 more or less in the south-western corner of the room in suit in his possession in favour of the plaintiff within one month from the date of this compromise and will allow the plaintiff within that period an access to that area. The said space will be walled up to the ceiling at the cost of the plaintiff and within one month. In the event of non-compliance with the terms contained above for his defendant-appeallant will be liable to ejectment in execution of the decree passed in the suit in terms of the compromise.

B. That the plaintiff will be entitled to build the upper story above the building in suit at his expense and a stair-case in the aforesaid south-western portion given up by the appellant through the opening already in existence for access to the said upper storey. The defendant-appellant will have no manner of right or claim for possession in the aforesaid upper story after construction.

C. That on compliance of the items mentioned in paragraph 1 the defendant-appellant shall remain in possession of the room in suit minus the area mentioned in paragraph 1 as a monthly tenant according to English Calendar month for a period of 10 years from 1st May, 1965 till 30th April, 1975 at a rent of Rs. 225/- per month, rent for each month being payable within the 14th day of the succeeding month. The defendant-appellant also undertakes to pay as he had been paying the Municipal Tax in respect of the room in his possession.

D. That the defendant-appellant shall not sublet any portion of the said room in his occupation nor transfer his tenancy right to any one else. The defendant-appellant will vacate and deliver possession of the room in his possession to the plaintiff or his assign or representative in interest on the expiry of the said period of 10 years without any notice from the plaintiff.

E. The defendant-appellant will have also the right to vacant the room or surrender the tenancy even before the expiry of the aforesaid period of 10 years on giving one months previous notice t