JUDGMENT

Agarwala, J - These two execution of decree appeals are connected and so we propose to decide them by one judgment. They were filed by Thakur Raghuraj Singh who has since died and is represented by Thakur Lal Bhagwat Singh. Thakur Raghuraj Singh executed two simple mortgage deeds in favour of the respondent, Lala Hari Kishan Das, one dated 17th February 1928 for Rupees 1,45,000 and another dated 25th October 1931 for Rs. 1,58,000. The mortgagee brought a suit on these mortgages on 25th April 1933 against the mortgagor Thakur Raghuraj Singh and Thakur Sheo Ganga Baksh Singh a subsequent mortgagee. He claimed RS. 8,88,300-2-6 by sale of the mortgaged property. A compromise was filed by the parties on 4th July 1938. A decree was passed on the basis of that compromise. The application of compromise was divided into the following nine paragraphs:

1. An absolute decree for sale for Rs. 3,28,300 and future interest from the date of the suit to this day at the stipulated rate and subsequently at the rate of annas eight per cent, per month and costs be passed in favour of the plaintiff against the defendants.

2. For the payment of the said decretal amount it has been settled that out of the mortgaged property defendant 1 will execute a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of a few villages which the plaintiff will select, which will be free from all defects, transfers and attachment and which will also be sufficient for the payment of the decretal amount and he will complete the execution of the sale deed within a week and the plaintiff will get it executed.

3. Defendant 2 will execute a deed of relinquishment in respect of the villages which will be sold.

4. An absolute sale deed will be executed in favour of the plaintiff, but defendant 1, his heirs, representatives and transferees or whom he may direct shall have power to take back the sold property on payment of the entire amount fixed in a lump sum or in instalments after five years and prior to next 15 years in the fallow season of the month of Jeth if he or they so like. The plaintiff, his heirs, representatives and transferees shall have no objection in returning the sale deed. Every body who will be in possession of the sold property will be bound by the said condition and this condition will be a 9 necessary part of the aforesaid absolute sale deed.

5. Defendants will deliver possession of the sold property on the date of execution of the sale deed to the plaintiff and will get the mutation of names effected in his favour.

6. The value of the sold property will be settled in this way that after deducting the land revenue, remissions allowed by the Government and sewai items whatever net profit including the income of sir and khudkasht for 1339F will be left the value will be fixed on the same net profit at the rate of six annas per cent, per month, that is if the said net profit be Rs. 4-8-0 annually the value of that property will be Rs. 100.

7. The proposed sale deed is in favour of the plaintiff. The entire mauza Kanmau together with the hamlets will be deemed hypothecated as before for the purpose of satisfying the liabilities relating 7 to sold property for which defendant 1 will be held liable and from the date of execution of the sale deed the remaining mortgaged property will be deemed free from the charge of the decree.

8. Defendant 1 will not claim ex-proprietary rights and if he claims he will be liable to pay the price to the extent thereof.

9. Every party has a right if he likes to get the decree registered.

2. The Court (Civil Judge of Sitapur) ordered that the suit be decreed in terms of the compromise. A decree was prepared on the basis of this compromise. On 25th May 1934, the decree-holder applied for execution of the decree. On 10th October 1934, the judgment-debter Thakur Raghuraj Singh filed an objection on which 21 issues were framed. The learned Civil Judge disposed of two issues, namely, issue 4.

Is the decree under consideration in