The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle that he who seeks equity shall also do equity, emphasizing the importance of fairness and compensation for delay in complying with the terms of a compromise decree.

The revision is directed against the order dated 9.3.2007 in E.P.No.23 of 2006 in O.S.No.33 of 2002 passed by the learned Munsiff, Erattupetta. The judgment debtor in the above execution petition is the revision petitioner, and the decree holder, the respondent. The decree executed in the proceedings was a compromise decree passed in a suit for perpetual prohibitory injunction. Petitioner/judgment debtor instituted the above suit to restrain the respondent/defendant from evicting him forcefully from the plaint schedule building. The respondent resisting the suit claim contended that the registered sale deed in respect of the plaint schedule property was executed in favour of the plaintiff/judgment debtor/revision petitioner as a security towards a loan transaction for a sum of Rs.One lakh on an agreement to reconvey the property on discharge of the debt within the time provided. The parties entered into a compromise in the suit by which petitioner/plaintiff agreed to execute a sale deed in respect of the plaint property in favour of the respondent/defendant subject to payment of the sum stated within the time fixed. Compromise stipulating the terms thereunder was accepted by the court and the suit was decreed in terms thereof. The terms of the compromise provided for payment of the sum agreed upon for reconveyance of the property on or before 25.10.2004. The respondent moved the execution petition on the basis of the compromise decree contending that there was default on the part of the petitioner/plaintiff to execute the sale deed. The execution sought for was resisted by the petitioner imputing default on the part of the respondent/decree holder. He also raised objections that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the execution petition as the amount fixed under the decree was beyond its pecuniary limits, that the decree has become inexecutable by lapse of time since the time fixed under the compromise for payment was over, and that the charges subsisting over the property had been cleared by the petitioner/plaintiff expending substantial sums etc. The execution court, after considering the objections raised, negatived them as not sustainable and ordered the judgment debtor to execute the sale deed in favour of the respondent/decree holder on deposit of the sum specified in the compromise decree with the amount which the judgment debtor had paid to the bank to clear the encumbrance over the property, with interest, within the time fixed. It was also ordered that in default of the execution of the sale deed after such deposit, the respondent/decree holder can get the sale deed executed through court. In the event of default of the decree holder to deposit the amount within the time fixed, it was held he would lose all his right over the property and it shall remain in the absolute ownership and possession of the judgment debtor. Correctness and propriety of the above order passed by the execution court is challenged in the revision.

2. I heard the counsel on both sides. Learned counsel for the petitioner/judgment debtor had reiterated the objections raised before the execution court to contend the decree is inexecutable as the balance amount fixed under the compromise decree had not been paid within the time stipulated. Specific terms of the compromise should be implemented within the time fixed is highlighted by the counsel. Nonpayment of the sum within such period was fatal. Subsequently event after the time fixed as to the judgment debtor discharging the encumbrance over the property to a society treating himself as the owner of the property is also highlighted by the learned counsel to contend that the decree was no longer executable. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/decree holder contended that as rightly held by the court below time for payment was not the essence of the decree. The decree can be executable only on default of one or other party to comply with the terms after the expir