https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301954 A consent decree entered in a mortgage matter was held void as against a minor who was not conclusively bound by an earlier age determination made without notice to him. The court held that the age order did not operate as res judicata, and the minor could prove that he was still under age when the compromise was made. A separate suit to impeach the decree for fraud, collusion, and gross negligence of guardians ad litem was maintainable, and the absence of a specific challenge to the final decree did not bar relief. However, the other plaintiffs failed because mere guardian negligence, without proved fraud or collusion, was insufficient to invalidate the compromise for them. en-us Tue, 01 Feb 1927 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Apr 2022 12:34:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301954 A consent decree entered in a mortgage matter was held void as against a minor who was not conclusively bound by an earlier age determination made without notice to him. The court held that the age order did not operate as res judicata, and the minor could prove that he was still under age when the compromise was made. A separate suit to impeach the decree for fraud, collusion, and gross negligence of guardians ad litem was maintainable, and the absence of a specific challenge to the final decree did not bar relief. However, the other plaintiffs failed because mere guardian negligence, without proved fraud or collusion, was insufficient to invalidate the compromise for them. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 01 Feb 1927 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301954