When a Compromise Decree Fails: Supreme Court on Burden of Proof in Execution
The Supreme Court held that the burden of proof in execution proceedings lies squarely on the decree-holder to establish a willful violation of the decree's terms. Mere assertions without independent evidence are insufficient. The Court found no cogent proof that the judgment-debtor had breached the 1933 compromise decree, and thus declined to execute it.
Facts Of The Case:
The case originates from a long-standing dispute between two factions of the Kuruba community in Andhra Pradesh over the custody of idols and the performance of rituals for their common deity, Lord Sangalappa Swamy. The initial litigation dates back to 1927. The matter culminated in a compromise decree on November 1, 1933, which stipulated that the idols would be rotated every six months between the villages of ...