https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299346 Section 44 of the Indian Evidence Act permits a party to show that a decree relied on was obtained by fraud or collusion, and that challenge may also be raised through an independent suit where the decree affects the party's rights. The note further states that assessment records describing the concern as HUF and joint family property supported a prima facie view of joint family ownership, and that a coparcener may seek partition during the father's lifetime. On the material then available, no prima facie case of fraud or collusion or balance of convenience for stay was made out, so interim relief was refused. en-us Mon, 27 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:07:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299346 Section 44 of the Indian Evidence Act permits a party to show that a decree relied on was obtained by fraud or collusion, and that challenge may also be raised through an independent suit where the decree affects the party's rights. The note further states that assessment records describing the concern as HUF and joint family property supported a prima facie view of joint family ownership, and that a coparcener may seek partition during the father's lifetime. On the material then available, no prima facie case of fraud or collusion or balance of convenience for stay was made out, so interim relief was refused. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 27 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299346