S. S. M. QUADRI, J.

( 1 ) THE controversy in this C. R. P. has its seed in the womb of the compromise which was entered into between the parties in the earlier round of litigation. It relates to executability of the compromise decree in proceeding initiated by the petitioner under the A. P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1950 (hereinafter called as "the Act )- The petitioner is the landlady and the respondent is the tenant. The landlady filed an application for eviction of the tenant in R. C. C. No. 9 of 1987 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Kavali, on two grounds, viz. , i) wilful default, and ii) bona-fide requirement for the business of her son. The parties compromised and the learned Principal District Munsif passed decree in terms of compromise on 24-11-1988. Pursuant to the said compromise decree the tenant was to deliver vacant possession of the premises to the landlady on or before September 30,1991. As the tenant failed to do so, the landlady filed E. P. No. 102 of 1991. The tenant raised the objection that the compromise decree of eviction is nullity and the same is not executable. The executing court held that the decree was nullity and not

Click Here to Read the rest of this document