2016 (2) TMI 1380

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed a suit for declaration to the effect that she is owner in possession of 1/4th share measuring 10 Bighas 3 Biswas 15 Biswansies out of land measuring 40 Bighas 15 Biswas 15 Biswansies as shown in the plaint. Judgment and decree dated 06.10.1979 was assailed to be collusive, ineffective, illegal, null and void. Prohibitory injunction was also sought, restraining the defendants from alienating 1/4th share of the land in any manner. 2. Plaintiff alleged that parties to the litigation were Hindu Jat Sikhs and she inherited the land in dispute after the death of her parents. She never transferred the land in question in favour of defendants by way of any family settlement, nor delivered the possession off; the land. Defendants by way of misre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s maintainable in view of bar created under Order 23 Rule 3-A CPC? 2. Whether civil Court decree dated 06.10.1979 being a compromise decree required compulsory registration?" 9. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and have also perused the record. 10. Evidently the civil Court decree dated 06.10.1979 came to be passed on the basis of compromise where the plaintiff appeared in the Court below along with her counsel and admitted the compromise deed in civil suit No. 562 of 04.10.1979. The decree was implemented in terms of revenue record after sanctioning mutation on the basis of said collusive decree. 11. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that particulars of fraud have not been pleaded and proved in the case and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....intiff was totally incapacitated on account of such ailment. Secondly the plaintiff appeared in the earlier suit after engaging an Advocate and made statement before the Court below Ex.D-4. 15. The particulars of fraud have not been pleaded in the plaint in terms of Order 6 Rule 4 CPC. On the contrary report of expert Ex.DW-6/A i.e. report of Sh. Dewan K.S. Puri pointed out that Jagtar Kaur appeared in the Court and filed the written statement, compromise and also suffered statement in favour of present defendants. The decree was based on written compromise Ex.DW-2. 16. In view of bar created under Order 23 Rule 3-A CPC, no suit shall lie to set aside the decree on the ground that compromise on which the suit was based was not lawful. At ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....us for the period of 30 years. No particulars of treatment have been brought on record with reference to diagnosis. Even, if, the decease Epilepsy is taken to be in consideration, the same cannot be presumed to be a continuous disease during 30 years in the absence of any such evidence on record. 20. The plaintiff was treated by registered medical practitioner/R.M.P. doctor. The power of attorney of plaintiff was executed in favour of Sh. Hem Raj, Advocate (since deceased) and compromise Ex.D-1 and Ex.D-2 were executed. The plaint of the earlier suit was proved on record by way of certified copy which was proved by Sh. Raghubir Rattan, Advocate-PW-2. The statement suffered by plaintiff in the earlier suit Ex.D-3 and Ex.D-4 coupled with sta....