Ram Sharma vs Ashok Kumar Sharma

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Ram Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Kumar Sharma – Respondent

Table of Content
1. allegations of fraud and ownership claims (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. background of the civil suit and settlement terms (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
3. overview of order xxiii rule 3 of cpc (Para 12 , 13 , 14)
4. nature of compromise decree and its legal standing (Para 15 , 16 , 17)
5. challenges to consent decree and ownership proof requirements (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
6. dismissal of the application (Para 26)

JUDGMENT

Neena Bansal Krishna, J.

I.A. 17698/2022 (U/O XXIII Rule 3 r/w Section 151 of CPC, 1908)

1. An application has been filed by Asha Sharma, wife of Defendant Ashok Kumar Sharma under Order XXIII Rule 3(sic) read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the CPC) to set aside the Judgement dated 12-12-2011 on the ground that a conspiracy was hatched by the parties to the suit by practicing fraud and concealment of material facts with an object to deprive the applicant of her due share in the suit properties.

2. It is stated in the application that Shri Ram Sharma filed the Civil Suit against his father, Shri Ashok Kumar Sharma (Defendant no. 1), brother-Shri Shyam Sharma (Defendant no. 2), sister-A

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

DELHI HIGH COURTNEENA BANSAL KRISHNARam Sharma – AppellantVersusAshok Kumar Sharma – Respondent

DELHI HIGH COURT
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Ram Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Kumar Sharma – Respondent