1. This appeal at the instance of the second defendant in the suit arises from a suit for declaration that a compromise decree entered into between defendants 1 to 3 on the one hand and defendants 4 to 6 on the other, in O. S.481 of 1956 of the Munsiff's Court of Alathur is not valid and binding on the plaintiff-The consequential relief prayed for in the suit is one of setting aside the order passed in execution of that compromise decree ok E. A. 605 of 1960, directing delivery of possession of the plaint property from the plaintiff after removing the obstruction by the plaintiff to the delivery. It is the plaintiff's case that pending the disposal of the suit O. S.481 of 1956 defendants 5 and 6 who were in possession of the property at that time as tenants of the 4th defendant, the jenmi, put the plaintiff (I am referring in this judgment to the parties with reference to their position in this suit unless otherwise indicated) in possession in part performance of an agreement of sale of the property to the plaintiff and that behind her back defendants 4 to 6 on the one band and defendants 1 to 3 on the other who were the plaintiffs in that suit compromised the suit auth