Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
R.K. PATTANAIK
Rokiya Bibi – Appellant
Versus
Sk. Nasim – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. modification request of court order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments on maintainability and status quo. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. legal foundation on compromise decree. (Para 7 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. court's reasoning on compromise decree applicability. (Para 13 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. final order and modification of the court's directive. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Instant IA is at the behest of opposite party No.1 seeking modification of the Court’s order dated 12th May, 2025 in CMP No.437 of 2025 on the grounds stated therein.
3. Heard Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Bose, learned counsel for opposite party No.1.
5. The contention of Mr. Bose, learned counsel for opposite party No.1 is that the suit instituted by the petitioners is not maintainable because Schedule-B property was already involved in the previous suit, decree of which, cannot be a subject of challenge in the suit instituted and pending before the learned court below in view of Order 23 Rule 3-A CPC. The further submission is that injunction having been refused, the status quo vis-à-vis the parties directed by this Court, while disposing of the CMP in respect of S
A party cannot challenge a compromise decree through a separate suit due to the restrictions imposed by Order 23 Rule 3-A of the Civil Procedure Code.
(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....
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.
The bar under Order XXIII Rule 3A of the CPC does not apply to a stranger to the compromise, and the plea of limitation is a mixed question of fact and law to be determined after evidence has been le....
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....
An appeal is not maintainable from a compromise decree under Section 96(3) of CPC, and the compromise decree confers only a right in personam and is not binding on parties who are not part of the com....
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
