A purely declaratory decree that creates a fresh lease is non-executable; ejectment requires a separate suit per law.

1. These two appeals are directed against an order passed by a single Judge of this Court in proceedings for execution of a decree passed by Nair, J. dated 23-12-1958. The learned Judge has directed that the decree in question is executable only to this extent that the applicant before him would be entitled to joint possession along with the judgment - debtors to the extent of their six annas share. The Judgment - debtors before the single judge challenged the executability of the decree while the decree - holders applicants prayed for Khas possession through the court by executing the decree. Both the judgment - debtors and the decree - holders have filed appeals against the order of the learned Single judge. As the two appeals involve common questions of fact and law, we propose to decide both these appeals by one common judgment. For the purpose of convenience judgment debtors before the trial court would be referred to as the non - applicants and decree - holders before the court below as applicants in this judgment.

2. The facts giving rise to the present appeals may be briefly summarised as follows : -
Sardar Uttam Singh Khorana had executed a lease in favour of the non - applicants judgment - debtors on 17th Assuj 2011 which was registered on 18th Assuj 2011 in respect of the building including cinema machinery and furniture. The lease was for a fixed term of three years and the rent payable under the lease was Rs. 3,000/- per month. One of the terms of the lease was that after the expiry of the lease, the tenants had the option to renew the lease with the consent of the landlord. After execution of the lease the non - applicants tenants came into possession of the properties leased out to them and started running a cinema business therein. On expiry of the period of lease, the landlord Sardar Uttam Singh Khorana brought a suit for ejectment against the non - applicants judgment - debtors on 6-3-1958, but Sardar Uttam Singh died during the pendency of the suit. Before his death, however, Uttam Singh had executed a will by which Joginder Singh and Davinder Singh two of his sons were to get 6 and 4 annas respectively in all his properties and for the remaining six annas a public trust was constituted. On 23-12-1958, a compromise was entered into between the legal representatives of the original landlord Sardar Uttam Singh and the non - applicants judgment - debtors by which the tenants were allowed to continue as lessees till 31-12-1962 on the terms and conditions of the lease. Under the compromise decree, however, the defendants were given the option to vacate even earlier than 1-1-1963 after giving two months notice in which case the landlords agreed not to charge rent for the remaining period of the lease.
The original lease was for a period of three years but by the compromise the fresh lease was for a period of four years. There was also a term in the agreement constituting the compromise that the tenants were liable to ejectment and were to vacate the premises on 1-1-1963. Subsequent to the terms and conditions of the original lease which were continued by the fresh lease on 1-11-1960, Joginder Singh one of the landlords sold his six anna share to the applicants Sudhir Kumar and others and assigned his interest in the decree for a consideration of one lakh and twenty five thousand. On 14-10-1961, the remaining landlords of ten annas share, Davinder Singh and the Trust executed an agreement in favour of the non - applicants judgment - debtors agreeing to r