IMPORTANT POINT
A compromise decree recognizing pre-existing tenancy rights does not require registration, upholding the right to execute it based on agreed terms under the Civil Procedure Code.

ORDER :

This Civil Revision application is directed against order dated 24.01.2023 passed by the Execution Munsif, Muzaffarpur in Execution Case No. 22 of 2019 by which execution case filed by the petitioners/decree holders for getting possession of the shop in newly constructed building in terms of compromise decree dated 23.09.2016 passed in Title Suit No. 40 of 2016 was dismissed on the ground of its non-executability.

2. Brief facts of the case is that the petitioners were tenants of the opposite parties in a shop measuring 600 sq. ft. bearing Plot No. 179/539 under Khata No. 174 situated in Mohalla-Tilak Maidan Road, Muzaffarpur having the boundaries as follows:—

North- Gali (Lane)
South- Apsara Traders
East- Tilak Maidan

West-House of the opposite parties (defendants/judgment debtors)

2A. The petitioners filed Title Suit No. 40 of 2016 in the Court of learned Munsif, Muzaffarpur (East) against the opposite parties/defendants. The aforesaid suit was filed for permanently restraining the defendants from taking illegal forceful possession over the suit premises in occupation of the plaintiffs/petitioners. The details of the shop is mentioned in Schedule-I of the plaint and for restraining the defendants from demolishing the portion standing over the roof of the showroom and from causing any damage to the showroom of the plaintiffs. It is further contended that the parties to the suit namely the plaintiffs/petitioners and the defendants/opposite parties entered into the compromise and they filed a joint compromise petition on 26.08.2016 in the suit praying therein to dispose of the suit in terms of compromise and to make compromise as a part of the decree in the suit. The terms as stated in compromise petition is that the plaintiffs would vacate the suit premises for its reconstruction and the defendants after construction of commercial building on the disputed land and other land shall handover the newly constructed shop facing east measuring 544 sq. ft. on the ground floor (16 ft wide north to south X 34 ft long east to west) east to Tilak Maidan Road and west to Smirti Plaza (Nij to defendant) in lieu of original tenanted shop of the plaintiffs. The details of the proposed newly built shop to be given to the plaintiffs was mentioned in Schedule-II of the compromise petition. It is further submitted that in paragraph no. 5 of the compromise petition it is contended that the rent of the shop would be Rs. 22, 000/- (Twenty Two Thousand) per month subject to increase of 15% in rental at every three years and the rent would be payable from the date of getting possession of the shop.

3. It is further case of the petitioners that the compromise petition states that the defendants would handover newly constructed shop over Schedule-II land to the plaintiffs before 30.12.2017 and if the defendants make excuses in handing over the Schedule-II shop to the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs would have right to take possession of the same through execution of decree passed on the basis of compromise.

4. Learned Trial Court accepted the compromise petition and disposed of the suit in terms of compromise on 23.09.2016 and ordered to make the compromise petition part of the decree.

5. It is further case of the plaintiffs/petitioners that the defendants/judgment debtors/opposite parties did not handover the possession of the newly constructed shop of Schedule-II of the compromise decree to the plaintiffs decree holders/petitioners even after the expiry of stipulated period mentioned in the decree. The plaintiffs decree/holder were constrained to send notice dated 16.03.2018 and 20.08.2019 to the defendants/judgment debtors through their counsel requesting the possession of the shop constructed over Schedule-II of the decree and on failure on the part of the defendants/judgment debtors to deliver possession of the same to the plaintiffs/decree holders, they filed Title Execution Case No. 22 of 2019 in the Court of Special Execution Munsif, Muzaffarpur (East