S. VIMALA, J.

1. Resolution of dispute through agreeable and amicable settlement is a innovative and revolutionary democratic method contributed by India to the World Jurisprudence. In Lok Adalat, as it is popularily called, i.e. people's court, the litigants are at the centre stage, mutually negoitating, as to what each of them want. Since the litigants on both sides get what they wanted, it is said there are no victors and vanquished and, thus, no rancour. Experiment of Lok Adalat as an alternate mode of dispute settlement has come to be widely adopted in India, as a viable, economic, efficient and informal one. Such being the case, after settlement, whether one of the parties can be permitted to deprive the benefit of the compromise to the other party, by contenting, that there is no provision for execution and there is no direction to execute the sale deed, is the issue raised.

1.1 Lok Adalat is another alternative to Judicial Justice said the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P.T. Thomas vs. Thomas Job, Appeal (Civil) 4677 of 2005. When the enactment aims for speedy justice, still the litigants have developed a taste for prolonged litigation and procrastinate some how or other and this case is a classic one.

1.2 Whether the compromise decree should provide for a separate clause in providing for execution of sale deed by the seller and if not whether the decree would become inexecutable?

1.3 Whether the decree passed in the Lok Adalat can be executed only when it contains an express clause providing for execution of the decree and not otherwise?

These are the specific issues raised in the revision petition.

2. The defendants are the revision petitioners.

3. The plaintiff/respondent filed a suit for specific performance of the suit agreement dated 27.03.2010 under which defendants are alleged to have agreed to sell the suit property under the terms and conditions stipulated therein.

4. By the Joint Memo of compromise filed by the parties to the suit, Lok Adalat has passed a decree. The Joint Memo filed by the parties reads as under:

"The parties to the case entered into a compromise before the Lok Adalat.

"The terms of the compromise is that the Defendants are agreed to decree the suit as pray for without cost.

The plaintiff is agreed to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs. 82,64,280/- (Rupees Eighty Two Lakhs Sixty Four Thousand and Two Hundred and Eighty only) within three months from this date. The defendants are agreed to surrender all the original documents to the plaintiff within the three months time. If the plaintiff is not paid the balance sale consideration that this compromise will be stand concealed. It is prayed that the full court fee may be refunded to the plaintiff."

5. It is based upon this compromise decree an Execution Petition has been filed in E.P. No. 1 of 2014 in O.S. No. 15 of 2012. The Execution Petition was filed by the plaintiff/ decree holder directing the defendants/Judgment Debtor to execute the sale deed in accordance with the decree and to deliver vacant possession of the suit property. This Execution petition has been returned on the ground that there is no provision in the compromise decree providing for filing of the Execution Petition and that the Execution Petition seeking registration of sale deed is not maintainable, (without having a separate clause in the compromise decree to execute and register the sale deed).

5.1. The Execution Petition has been resubmitted with an endorsement that necessary application under Section 152 C.P.C. is filed to cure the defect in the certified copy of the decree. The decree holder had been under the impression that the decree had to be amended incorporating the clause providing for execution and registration of sale deed by the judgment debtor. Later on the Execution Petition has been numbered and the judgment debtors did not file any counter and they were set ex-parte. The Court by the order dated 11.03.2014 has ordered produ