Consent decree terms ordinarily cannot be altered without both parties' consent; rescheduling of payment was left undisturbed.

A consent decree based on compromise should ordinarily not be varied without the consent of both parties. The Court noted that substantial compliance had already been made and only future instalments remained, which constituted special circumstances against interference. It also held that the dispute concerning RC books could not be decided in the proceedings. On that basis, no ground was found to interfere with the High Court's rescheduling of payment under the consent decree, and the appeals were dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether interference was warranted with the High Court's order rescheduling payment under a consent decree.

Analysis: The consent decree was founded on compromise, and the Court indicated that such terms should not ordinarily be modified without the consent of both parties. The respondents had placed on record that substantial compliance had already been made and only future instalments remained. In view of these special circumstances, and since the controversy regarding the RC books could not be decided in the proceedings, no ground for interference was made out.

Conclusion: Interference with the impugned order was declined, and the appeals were dismissed.

---