https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290896 Execution of a compromise decree under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC remains confined to the decree's express terms, and the executing court cannot add fresh substantive reliefs. Directions for demarcation of the decree-holder's share were treated as premature because construction had not begun, while a requirement to ratify a proposed transfer of rights and a refund claim based on built-up area value were found to be outside the compromise terms. The execution court therefore could not travel beyond the decree or grant relief not contained in it, and the requested directions were rejected in execution proceedings. en-us Thu, 15 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Oct 2020 09:29:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290896 Execution of a compromise decree under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC remains confined to the decree's express terms, and the executing court cannot add fresh substantive reliefs. Directions for demarcation of the decree-holder's share were treated as premature because construction had not begun, while a requirement to ratify a proposed transfer of rights and a refund claim based on built-up area value were found to be outside the compromise terms. The execution court therefore could not travel beyond the decree or grant relief not contained in it, and the requested directions were rejected in execution proceedings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 15 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290896