Back
RAJNESH OSWAL
Gulam Nabi Khanday – Appellant
Versus
Mushtaq Ahmad – Respondent
JUDGEMENT
1. This Civil Revision is directed against the order dated 06.10.2022 passed by the Court of Learned Munsiff, Pulwama (for short ' the trial court'), whereby the application of the petitioners under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint has been dismissed.
2. The order has been impugned by the petitioners on the ground that the contesting respondents 1 to 5 could not have filed the suit against the petitioners for challenging the decree passed in suit titled "Ghulam Nabi Khanday & Anr. versus Mst. Azizi & Anr." by the court of learned Sub-Judge, Shopian, besides other reliefs, in view of the bar contained under Order 23 Rule 3-A CPC.
3. Mr. G.A. Lone, learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that once there was a decree passed pursuant to the compromise in respect of the suit property, the contesting respondents could not have filed the suit in view of the bar contained in Order 23 Rule 3-A CPC. Learned counsel further submitted that the judgments as reflected in the order impugned have been wrongly applied by the learned trial court. Mr. Lone, learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in
A party not involved in a compromise decree may challenge it if they do not claim rights through a party to that decree, as per Order 23 Rule 3-A.
Rejection of plaint – Bar contained under Order 23 Rule 3-A of CPC shall not be applicable to a stranger to compromise decree challenging compromise decree provided he is not claiming any right throu....
A party aggrieved by a compromise decree has a right to challenge the compromise decree by way of an appeal or to approach the same court which passed such decree by way of an appropriate application....
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,....
(1) No suit shall lie to set aside a decree on the ground that compromise on which decree is based was not lawful.(2) Mere clever drafting would not permit plaintiff to make suit maintainable which o....
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....
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.
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.
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
