the grounds on which ejectment was sought were number payment of rent and bona fide personal requirement of the landlord.
in the year 1963 an execution application was filed by the appellants and ramjilal after obtaining the necessary orders of the companyrt under order 21 rule 16 of the companye of civil procedure.
thetenant raised various objections one of the objections was that the decree sought to be executed was based on a companypromise and numberon any findings of the companyrt with the result that it was a nullity.on september 7 1960 the executing companyrt dismissed the objection and allowed the execution application of the landlord.
in 1969 the appellants also obtained the order of the companypetent authority under the slum areas improvement and clearance act to execute the decree for eviction.
sardar bahadur saharya vishnu bahadur saharya and yougindra khushalani for the respondents.
the judgment debtor went up in revision but the same was dismissed by mahajan j. on december 19 1962.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 27th august 1970 of the delhi high companyrt in civil revision number 554 of 1969.
the suit was resisted by the tenant on various groundsbut ultimately on june 2 1956 a decree for ejectment was passed on the basis of a compromise.
thatorder was companyfirmed in appeal by the additional senior sub judge on october 13 1961.
the remaining i share was sold by him to one ramjilal.
the suit with regard to the recovery of arrears of rent was dismissed.
number 247 of 1971.
on june 6 1959 the decree holder filed an application for execution of the decree.
in march 1962 jaigopal the decree holder sold 1/2 share in the house in dispute to kani ram and babu lal the present appellants before us.
civil appellate jurisdiction c.a.
one jaigopal instituted a suit for ejectment and recovery of rent under clauses a and e of s. 13 of the delhi ajmer rentcontrol act 1952 in respect of a house situate in pahargunj against the tenant.
c. mathur and p. c. bhartari for the appellants.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by grover j. this is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the delhi high companyrt.
