9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Revision against order in partition suit - Allegation of fraud and misrepresentation in joint Memo - Dismissal of application under Sec. 151 C.P.C. - Consideration of inherent powers of the Court under Sec. 151 C.P.C. - Rejection of review application for fraud or misrepresentation - Justification for dismissing the application for amendment Analysis: 1. The judgment involves a revision filed by defendant 2 against an order in a partition suit over property left by their father. The suit initially led to a joint Memo signed by all parties, including the plaintiff and defendant 2, determining their respective shares. However, defendant 2 later alleged fraud and misrepresentation in signing the joint Memo, leading to the present dispute. 2. The trial Court dismissed defendant 2's application under Sec. 151 C.P.C., citing that challenging a compromise decree on the grounds of unlawfulness was barred by O. 23 R. 3A C.P.C. The Court held that the only recourse was a review application under O. 47 C.P.C., which did not apply to fraud or misrepresentation in the compromise. 3. The judgment delves into the inherent powers of the Court under Sec. 151 C.P.C. to set aside orders obtained by fraud. Citing legal precedents, the judgment emphasizes the Court's authority to intervene in cases of fraud or misrepresentation, even if a compromise decree has been recorded. 4. The judgment rejects defendant 2's argument for leading evidence on the alleged fraud, stating that the Court's role is not to prompt parties to present evidence. It highlights the timeline of events leading to the fraud allegation, indicating a lack of merit in defendant 2's claims. 5. Additionally, the judgment addresses defendant 2's application for amending the written statement to assert the property as separate, contrary to previous admissions. The Court upholds the trial Court's decision to reject the amendment application based on the inconsistency with prior statements. 6. Ultimately, the Court finds no substance in the revision and dismisses it without costs, affirming the trial Court's decisions regarding the application under Sec. 151 C.P.C. and the amendment application.
|
