https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192062 A compromise recorded in execution proceedings, under which the judgment-debtor agreed to pay enhanced interest in return for postponement of execution, was enforceable. The executing court had jurisdiction to decide disputes arising between the parties under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure and to grant relief on questions relating to execution. The arrangement was treated as part of a fair bargain incidental to execution, not as an impermissible variation of the decree. The provisions of Order 23 and Order 20 did not bar enforcement, and the limitation objection did not defeat the recorded compromise. en-us Fri, 09 Feb 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 May 2017 14:22:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192062 A compromise recorded in execution proceedings, under which the judgment-debtor agreed to pay enhanced interest in return for postponement of execution, was enforceable. The executing court had jurisdiction to decide disputes arising between the parties under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure and to grant relief on questions relating to execution. The arrangement was treated as part of a fair bargain incidental to execution, not as an impermissible variation of the decree. The provisions of Order 23 and Order 20 did not bar enforcement, and the limitation objection did not defeat the recorded compromise. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 09 Feb 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192062