AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Wadsworth, J.—This appeal arises out of an order in execution of a compromise decree. The only question raised in the appeal relates to an
amount of Rs. 676 which was included in the compromise as premium in respect of land described as old waste, for the occupation of which the
compromise makes provision. It is contended that this portion of the decree is illegal in the light of Section 25 of the Madras Estates Land Act as
amended in 1934, and that the appellants are entitled to contend in bar of execution that to this extent the decree is opposed to the statute. They
rely on certain observations in Ambu Mair v. Kelu Nair ILR (1929) Mad. 805.
It seems to me that the obscurations upon which the appellants rely have no bearing on the present, case. Under the Madras Estates Land Act
as it stood at the time when this compromise decree was passed, the decree for the payment of nazardna in respect of old waste was lawful. That
decree the respondent is executing at a time when the law has changed. In my opinion, it is not open to the appellants to plead in bar of execution a
provision of law which was not in existence at the time when the decree was passed. The appeal therefore fails and is dismissed with costs;