1. This judgment will dispose of C. R. No. 437-D of 1958 and C. R. No. 5490-D of 1959 as identical points are involved in both the petitions. The facts, however, in Vas Dev Sharmas case alone need be stated, at first.

2. The tenancy of the suit premises commenced in the year 1943. In December,, 1951, a suit for ejectment was filed against the tenant but it failed in the first Court and the appellant Court. In June, 1954, a suit for ejectment was filed against the tenant on three ground viz., perversion of user, non-payment of rent and requirement for personal occupation. There was a compromise on 9th November, 1955. A decree for ejectment was passed in terms of the compromise according to which the tenant was to vacate the premises by 30th April, 1957. The rent was to be paid month by month on or before the 16th of every month. The tenant was not to sublet any portion of the premises. After 30th April, 1957, the landlord took out execution of the decree but the tenant raised an objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure that as the ejectment decree was passed on the basis of a compromise it was invalid and could not be executed. Another plea taken was that a