M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Mavullathil Anandan – Appellant
Versus
Kannampoliyan Nanu – Respondent
ORDER :- A compromise petition was filed signed by plaintiff, defendants, except one and their counsel. A compromise decree was passed in terms of the compromise. Whether the defendants, who did not sign the compromise petition, is entitled to file an application to set aside the compromise decree on the ground that he is not a signatory to the compromise alleging fraud ? Whether the signature of the counsel for the party in a compromise petition is sufficient and whether it is mandatory that all the parties to sign the compromise petition? There the questions to be settled in the revision petition.
2. Respondents 1 and 2 are the plaintiffs. Petitioner and his brothers, respondents 3 and 4, are defendants. O.S. 357/94 was filed before Sub-Court, Thalassery for fixation of boundaries. After Commissioner submitted a report and plan, objection was filed to the report. Thereafter a settlement was arrived at between the parties. I.A. 814/01 was filed on 7-3-2001. In that compromise petition signed by first plaintiff and defendants 3 and 4 and counsel appearing for plaintiffs and defendants, it was stated that the dispute was settled between the parties accepting the report and p
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.