2006 (I) OLR (SC) — 643
H. K. SEMA AND DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, JJ.
N. Khosla... Appellant
Versus
Rajlakshmi (dead) & Ors... Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3280 of 2002
Decided on 6th March, 2006.
2. CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 - Secs. 33, 13 - Constitution of India - Art. 136 - Fraud on Court - Gift of immovable property made to respondent-daughters of deceased revoked - Respondent accepted cash payment in lieu of their share - Partition of property between sons - Respondents fraudulently obtained mutation in their favour showing deceased as present and witnessing said mutation - Deceased donor in fact had expired long before that - Fraud avoids all judicial acts - A decree obtained by playing fraud is a nullity and it can be challenged in any Court, even in collateral proceedings - Mutation obtained by fraudulent means is non est just like decree obtained by fraud is nullity. (Paras - 30 to 33)
JUDGMENT
H. K. SEMA, J. — Dewan Niranjan Prasad was ex-Minister and a retired Senior Judge of the High Court of Patiala. He had an ancestral kothi known as ‘Nishkam’ situated at 23, Bhupender Nagar Road, Patiala, Punjab. He had two sons, namely- Sh. K. J. Khosla and Sh. N. Khosla and three daughters namely Smt. Rajlakshmi (respondent No.1 herein whose appeal stands abated), Smt. Nirmala and Smt. Saraswati. Since the kothi was an ancestral property, Dewan Niranjan Prasad and his two sons were the coparceners.
2. On 14.10.1956, Dewan Niranjan Prasad had gifted thee plots of land forming part of the kothi in its rear portion to his three daughters with the consent of his wife - Smt. Amar Devi and his two sons. The said gift was duly recorded in the family year book known as "Dussehra Bahi". The said gift was conditional and the condition was that the beneficiaries would construct houses on the gifted plots and shall reside there. The said gift of plots to his three daughters was affirmed by Dewan Niranjan Prasad through a regis¬tered deed on 10.6.1961. However, possession was not delivered. In 1966 Smt. Saraswati died and was survived by her husband B.S. Talwani and sons, respondent No.3.
3. As none of the three daughters, to whom the plots were gifted, took possession and constructed the houses, Dewan Niran¬jan Prasad revoked the Gift Deed and resumed the plots with the express consent of his daughters, Smt. Rajlakshmi, Smt. Nirmala and Sh. B.S. Talwani - husband of late Smt.Saraswati and paid Rs. 10,000/- to each of them in lieu of the said plots. Receipt of the amount as consideration for resumption of the said plots was also duly acknowledged by each of the beneficiaries. Thereafter, Dewan Niranjan Prasad partitioned the entire property “Nishkam” (including the plots earlier gifted to his daughters and then resumed by him) by allotting separate shares to his two sons,namely, S/Sh.K.J. Khosla and N. Khosla. The oral partition was recorded in writing in the memo of partition dated 6.12.1974. Dewan Niranjan Prasad died on 15.1.1975 leaving behind his two sons, two daughters and legal heirs of late Smt. Saraswati.
4. After the death of Dewan Niranjan Prasad, a dispute arose between his sons and daughters- namely Smt. Rajlakshmi, Smt. Nirmala and legal heirs of Smt. Saraswati regarding the rear part of the compound of the ancestral kothi called “Nishkam”. Parties to the dispute by mutual consent and by an Arbitration Agreement dated 27.10.1978 referred the dispute to the sole Arbitrator, Dewan Ram Kishan Khosla, Sr. Advocate.
5. It appears that on 22.1.1977, the respondents fraudu¬lently managed to get the mutation of the portion of the property in question recorded in the revenue records in their favour show¬ing Dewan Niranjan Prasad, who had expired on 15.1.1975 and Smt. Saraswati, who had expired in 1966, as present and witnessing the said mutation.
6. The Arbitrator examined the contentious issues presented, from both sides and after threadbare discussion deliv¬ered his award on 10.7.1979. The Arbitrator in his award found inter alia that the gift in question in favour of daughters was revoked and the plots were resumed by late Dewan Niranjan Prasad with the consent of the two daughters and Sh. B.S. Talwani- husband of Smt. Saraswati in lieu of cash payment received by them. The Arbitrator also found that the mutation in favour of the respondents was obtained by fraudulent means and therefore, non est.
7. On 1.8.1979, S/Sh, K.J. Khosla and N. Khosla, the two sons of Dewan Niranjan Prasad filed an application under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for making the award a Rule of the Court. It appears that on 24.5.1981, notice of the applica¬tion was issued to the respondents who filed objections contend¬ing inter alia that the award dated 10.7.1979 created, declared, assigned, limited or extinguished right, title and interest of the value of Rs.100 and upwards to, or in immovable property and, therefore, the award was com
1.(2003) 3 SCC 272 : Sardar v. Pramod...15
3.(1999) 2 SCC 448 : Badni v. Siri Chand...17
5.AIR 1963 SC 553 : Ram v. Munshi...18
8.(1974) 1 SCC 671 : Ratan v. Purshottam...29
2.(2004) 7 SCC 354 : Shahazada v. Halimabi...16
4.(1966) 3 SCR 451 : Pandit v. M/s. Jagdish...18
6.AIR 1987 SC 841 : Capt. Ashok v. Mrs. Sudha...27
SupremeToday
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.