In this case by the compromise decree passed on 27th September, 1962 defendants 2 to 5 in O.S. No. 1033 of 1956 were directed to remove the asbestos shed and deliver possession of the property to the appellant (plaintiffs in O.S. No. 1033 of 1956) on or before 31st August, 1966 and in default the appellants shall be entitled straightaway to recover possession of the property from the defendants 2 to 5 in the said suit by executing the decree. By means of this petition the said defendants 2 to 5 pray for further extension of time for removal of the shed and delivery of possession of the premises to the plaintiffs. They say that though they expected to get possession of an adjoining vacant site within the time stipulated, it has not been possible for them to do so. It is urged on their behalf by Sri T. K. Subramania Pillai, the learned Counsel, that they have invested about Rs. 3 lakhs on the property, and that it will cause undue hardship to them if they are directed to remove the shed and deliver possession to the plaintiffs before 31st August, 1966.

This application is stoutly opposed by plaintiff-respondents. Their learned Counsel Sri D. Ramaswami Iyengar urges that the de