https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313721 Fraud allegations allowed third parties with an established proprietary interest to invoke the court's inherent power to recall a compromise and sale order even after the lis had ended. The challenge succeeded only to the extent of the petitioners' vested inherited share: the Pratapaditya Road property was not voided in entirety, and the settlement was modified to exclude their father's share. The same limitation applied to the Ultadanga Road property, the thika-tenanted structure, and movable assets, which could not be transferred without their consent. Want of Income-tax clearance did not invalidate the court-sanctioned sale, as the pre-clearance rule was treated as inapplicable to a bona fide court sale. en-us Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 May 2024 14:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313721 Fraud allegations allowed third parties with an established proprietary interest to invoke the court's inherent power to recall a compromise and sale order even after the lis had ended. The challenge succeeded only to the extent of the petitioners' vested inherited share: the Pratapaditya Road property was not voided in entirety, and the settlement was modified to exclude their father's share. The same limitation applied to the Ultadanga Road property, the thika-tenanted structure, and movable assets, which could not be transferred without their consent. Want of Income-tax clearance did not invalidate the court-sanctioned sale, as the pre-clearance rule was treated as inapplicable to a bona fide court sale. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313721