Back
RAJESH SEKHRI
Ghulam Qadir Parray – Appellant
Versus
State of J&K – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Challenge in this petition has been thrown to an order dated 13.06.2016, propounded by learned Principal District Judge, Anantnag (hereinafter referred to as ‘the court below’) in appeal File No.01/2016 titled ‘Ghulam Mohammad Dar vs. Commissioner/Secretary to Govt. Rural Development, J&K, & Others’, vide which, on the joint submission/suggestion made at bar by counsels for the parties and consensus arrived at, the suit filed by respondent No.5 was disposed of with certain directions and the trial court was directed to draw the decree sheet.
2. Case of the petitioner is that on the request of official respondents, he donated 01 kanal of land under Khasra No.1487 situated at Halqa Nagbal-B for construction of Apna Panchayat Ghar. According to the petitioner, a detailed report was called vide communication dated 30.09.2015, which indicates that his land was taken over and the proposed Panchayat Ghar was agreed to be constructed over his land and it was also agreed that the construction work will be carried out by the petitioner and his son will be employed as Chowkidar. The petitioner dumped the building material on the aforesaid land for construction of the Panchayat G
A suit challenging a compromise decree not challenged, but the compromise itself is called into question, would be barred by the provisions of Order XXIII Rule 3A of CPC. Additionally, a third party,....
A suit where a decree based on compromise is not challenged, but compromise itself is called into question, would also be barred by provisions of Order XXIII Rule 3A of CPC.
A consent decree obtained by fraud must be challenged in the court that issued it; separate suits for challenge are not maintainable.
An independent suit challenging a consent decree is barred under Order XXIII Rule 3A of the C.P.C. if the allegations of fraud are predominantly about breach/non-compliance of the consent terms/conse....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a compromise deed, once recorded by the court, is lawful and binding, and a subsequent suit challenging the compromise decree is not maintaina....
An appeal against a consent decree is barred under Section 96(3) of the CPC; aggrieved parties must contest the decree's validity in the same court that issued it.
A compromise decree is binding on the parties to the suit and not on strangers, and a separate suit to challenge the compromise decree is not maintainable for strangers to the proceeding.
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
