ORDER :

1. This Contempt Case has been filed seeking to punish the respondent for willful disobedience and violation of the order, dated 24.11.1997 passed in S.A. No. 403 of 1995.

2. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner are that the petitioner Ashramam was established in the year 1926 by Sri Maharshi Sadguru Sri Malayala Swamy and now he is the Peetadhi Pathi of the said Ashramam. The petitioner Ashramam is having so many properties including the land in an extent of Ac. 1-52 cents in Sy. No. 679/1 of Chittoor Town of Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh. The father of the respondent was the leaseholder of the subject land. In spite of so many demands made by the petitioner Ashramam, the father of the respondent did not hand over the subject land.

3. Thereafter, the petitioner filed O.S. No. 935 of 1986, on the file of the II Additional District Munsif Court, Chittoor, for delivery of possession of the subject land. The learned II Additional District Munsif Court, Chittoor, on 15.07.1993 decreed the suit. Aggrieved by the same, the father of the respondent filed A.S. No. 1 of 1995, on the file of the District Judge’s Court, Chittoor. The learned District Judge, Chittoor dismissed the appeal and confirmed the decree and judgment of the trial Court. Aggrieved by the Judgment of the District Judge, Chittoor, the father of the respondent preferred S.A. No. 403 of 1995 before the Hon’ble High Court.

4. During the pendency of the 2nd appeal, the father of the respondent died and the respondent, his mother and sisters came on record as Legal Representatives. Thereafter, the respondent compromised the issue with the petitioner Ashramam. Accordingly, a Compromise Memo was filed in CMP No. 18816 of 1997. The Hon’ble Court on 24.11.1997, after considering the compromise memo and recording the terms of the compromise, passed the decree in S.A. No. 402 of 1995, which is extracted herein-under:

(1) That the appellants, who are the Legal Representatives of Sri Vuppalapati Ananda Naidu, admit unequivocally the title of Peetadhipathi of Vyasasramam Mutt to the said property, which consist of an extent of Ac. 1-20 cents in Sy. No. 679/1, Chittoor and building thereon.

(2) It is also agreed that lease deed shall be operative till 28.08.2020 subject to all the conditions set out in the lease deed, dated 28.08.1990.

(3) That the appellants undertake to surrender possession of the suit properties along with structures to the respondent on or before 28.08.2020 without any notice or demand from the respondent.

(4) In case the appellants default in payment of rent for three consecutive months, the lease arrangements shall stand terminated and the respondents shall become entitled to enter into and take possession of the properties without necessity for approaching any court or authority. The appellants undertake that in such in event they will not resist the entry of the respondent and will peacefully handover the possession of all properties.

5. As per the terms of the compromise, despite the petitioner approached the respondent, he did not handover the possession of the subject land even after completing the lease deed, dated 28.08.1990. As such, the respondent willfully disobeyed the orders of this Hon’ble Court.

6. Complaining the action of the Respondent in not implementing the orders of this Court, the petitioner filed this Contempt Case.

7. The Respondent filed his counter-affidavit. Reply affidavit also filed by the Petitioner to the Counter-affidavit of Respondent.

8. The respondent filed Counter Affidavit contending that basing on the compromise decree entered between both parties, the respondent handover the theatres to the petitioner. Thereafter, the respondent sent an Written Letter dated 20.07.2020 to the petitioner through Courier seeking extension of lease agreement over the Theatres for further 11 years. The respondent met the petitioner personally and requested to extend the lease period in view of Covid-19. Thereupon, the petitioner, whil