SMT. KALLOO & ORS. vs DHAKADEVI & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that a compromise during the execution of a decree for eviction may either extinguish the decree and create a fresh lease or provide a mode for discharging the decree, depending on the parties' intention. In this case, the Court found that the intention was not to create a fresh lease but to allow the judgment-debtor time to vacate the premises, as evidenced by the use of the term 'damages' instead of 'rents'. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the lower court's decision that the decree for eviction remained executable.