2008 Supreme(Del) 1182

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
S.MURALIDHAR
EAST END APARTMENTS COOPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY - Appellant
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - Respondent
W.P.(C) 3326/2006
CM(M) 1558/2007
AND W.P.(C) 311/2008
Decided On : 27-11-2008

A decree obtained by fraud is a nullity and can be challenged at any time.

Headnote:

LAND ACQUISITION - SUIT FOR POSSESSION - DECREE OBTAINED BY FRAUD - SETTING ASIDE OF DECREE - CONTEMPT OF COURT - Ashok Nagar Welfare Association, through its President Mr. Mohan Singh, filed a suit for possession of 13 Bighas of land in Khasra No. 391/263, claiming ownership and dispossession by private parties. The DDA, which had acquired the land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1984, and taken possession in 1982, was not made a party to the suit. The Association obtained an ex parte decree in 1999, which was set aside by the High Court in 2005 for failure to comply with the direction to file an amended memo of parties. The DDA filed a CM(M) to set aside the ex parte decree and an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree. The Association filed a writ petition challenging the DDA's actions and seeking a declaration of its ownership rights. Another writ petition was filed by a Cooperative Society seeking a declaration that the Association had no right to the land. The Court held that the suit was an abuse of process and the decree was obtained by practicing fraud on the court. The Association had suppressed the fact that its writ petition challenging the acquisition had been dismissed and the status quo order vacated. The Association was restrained from filing further proceedings and directed to pay costs. The Court also issued a show-cause notice to Mr. Mohan Singh for contempt of court for procuring the decree by suppression of facts and repeatedly filing suits despite the land being vested in the State Government.

Fact of the Case:

The Ashok Nagar Welfare Association (plaintiff Association) filed a suit for possession of 13 Bighas of land in Khasra No. 391/263, claiming ownership and dispossession by private parties. The DDA, which had acquired the land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1984, and taken possession in 1982, was not made a party to the suit. The Association obtained an ex parte decree in 1999, which was set aside by the High Court in 2005 for failure to comply with the direction to file an amended memo of parties. The DDA filed a CM(M) to set aside the ex parte decree and an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree. The Association filed a writ petition challenging the DDA's actions and seeking a declaration of its ownership rights. Another writ petition was filed by a Cooperative Society seeking a declaration that the Association had no right to the land.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the suit was an abuse of process and the decree was obtained by practicing fraud on the court. The Association had suppressed the fact that its writ petition challenging the acquisition had been dismissed and the status quo order vacated. The Association was restrained from filing further proceedings and directed to pay costs. The Court also issued a show-cause notice to Mr. Mohan Singh for contempt of court for procuring the decree by suppression of facts and repeatedly filing suits despite the land being vested in the State Government.

Issues: 1. Whether the suit filed by the plaintiff Association was an abuse of process and the decree was obtained by practicing fraud on the court? 2. Whether the Association was justified in filing various suits against alleged encroachers with a view to protect the possession of the members of the Association?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. A suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act is not maintainable against the State Government. 2. A decree obtained by fraud is a nullity and can be challenged at any time. 3. A litigant who approaches the court must come with clean hands and disclose all relevant facts. 4. Suppression of a material document amounts to fraud on the court. 5. Filing a series of suits with a view to grab land which has been vested in the State Government amounts to criminal contempt.

Final Decision: CM(M) No. 1558/2007 is allowed and the impugned decree dated 6th January, 1999 and the order dated 23rd July, 2005 dismissing the application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC are quashed and set aside. Suit No.222/1998 is dismissed and the execution proceedings in Execution No. 74/99 (now Execution No. 18/04) are also dismissed. Mr. Mohan Singh shall pay the cost of CM(M) to the DDA, quantified at Rs.10 lacs. The costs shall be payable within a period of eight weeks from today failing which the DDA is at liberty to recover the same in accordance with law. Registry is directed to ascertain the status of the various proceedings mentioned in paragraph 19 of the judgment and all these proceedings which are pending as of date before the courts subordinate to this court shall stand withdrawn to this court and be placed before this Bench on 15th December, 2008 for passing further orders. In the meantime, Ashok Nagar Welfare Association, Mahakaleshwar Welfare Society and Mr. Mohan Singh, who is claiming to be the President of these societies, are restrained from filing / instituting or initiating any proceedings, whether civil or criminal, in respect of 141 Bighas and 15 Biswas of land and any other land which forms the subject matter of Award No. 39/82-83 dated 30th September, 1982. Criminal case filed by Mr. Mohan Singh being Criminal Case No.1346/2008 shall also be withdrawn to this Court and be placed before this Court on 15th December, 2008. Let the Registry issue a notice to Mr. Mohan Singh s/o Mr. M.L. Singh, without process fee, to show cause as to why he should not be punished for contempt of court for the following acts: (a) procuring a decree in Suit No.222/1998 (Suit No.1066/1990) by suppressing the fact that the writ petition of the plaintiff Association was dismissed and status quo was vacated, and (b) repeatedly filing suits and proceedings in respect of Khasra No.391/263, 392/264, 393/264 and 402/268 in spite of the fact that possession of the said land was taken pursuant to the award No.39/82-83 and the land stood vested in the State Government and the petitions filed by the plaintiff Association were dismissed by the High Court and orders of the High Court were confirmed by the Supreme Court. DMRC is free to proceed with the construction of the Metro Station in the land allotted by the DDA in terms of the orders dated 20th December, 2007 and 4th January, 2008 and the DMRC will be free to deal with the said land in terms of the letter of allotment and the restriction regarding the user of the land placed by the orders dated 4th January, 2008 stands withdrawn. In view of the above directions, no further orders are necessary in Writ Petition (C) No. 3326/2006 and the same stands disposed of. Writ Petition (C) No. 311/2008 is hereby dismissed. Mr. Mohan Singh shall pay the cost of Rs.2.5 lacs each to DDA and DMRC. The cost shall be payable within a period of eight weeks from today failing which the DDA and DMRC will be entitled to recover the same from Mr. Mohan Singh in accordance with law. The documents contained in the sealed cover be placed before this court on the next date.