Back
SUDHANSHU DHULIA, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
Manjunath Tirakappa Malagi – Appellant
Versus
Gurusiddappa Tirakappa Malagi (Dead Through Lrs) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
SUDHANSHU DHULIA, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal arises out of pure civil proceedings initiated at the hands of the present appellants in the year 2003. The appellants filed a suit for declaring a compromise decree entered into between the respondents (defendants) as null and void, and not binding on the appellants. Additionally, the appellants also sought partition of a certain share in the ancestral property, which was in the possession of the defendants. The trial court dismissed the suit of the appellants vide order dated 02.03.2007. Thereafter, the appellants filed the first appeal before the High Court, which has also been dismissed by the impugned order dated 23.09.2022.
3. Since the present matter concerns various suits, we would like to state the facts of the matter in short and the same are as follows:
(b) Thereafter, in the year 1998, the appellants filed a suit (O.S No.219/1998) against their father and mother seeking partition and division of an
Compromise decree – Once Court passes compromise decree after such satisfaction, decree cannot be challenged in appeal as no appeal lies against compromise decree – Compromise decree cannot be challe....
Compromise decrees are binding unless legally challenged, and mere allegations of fraud do not invalidate established agreements without sufficient proof or a court ruling to the contrary.
A consent decree, valid under CPC rules, cannot be challenged in independent suits; remedy lies only in the court that recorded the compromise.
(1) Amendment of plaint – No application for amendment shall be allowed after trial has commenced, unless Court comes to conclusion that in spite of due diligence, party could not have raised the mat....
Ancestral property entitlement under Hindu Succession Act limits the plaintiff's share to 1/8, not 3/8, affirming the rights of coparceners post-amendment.
A party may file a suit to enforce a compromise decree when non-compliance is proven, regardless of previous dismissals for the same cause of action.
The court upheld the voluntary compromise between parties regarding partition claims and confirmed the modification of the decree, emphasizing the absence of coercion and mutual satisfaction with the....
When they are not shown to be in any manner perverse, illogical and irrational, resultantly, the substantial questions of law formulated are accordingly answered infavour of the plaintiff and against....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
