A judgment obtained by fraud is a nullity, and a person with a case based on falsehood has no right to approach the court.

1. Whether a litigant who obtains a judgment and decree in its favour by fraud, can be permitted to take the benefit of the same and claim execution thereof on the ground that the decree even if it had been obtained by fraud, had not been challenged in the appropriate forum within the stipulated period, is the significant question of law which arises for the consideration of this Court in this writ petition.

2. The petitioner is the Chandigarh Primary Co-operative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd., Roper. In this writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 20-11-1984 passed by the Deputy Secretary (Appeals) to Government of Punjab in the Department of Co-operation (Annexure P-5).

3. Briefly stated the facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are that the petitioner had advanced a loan of Rs. 30,000.00 to respondent No. 3 for the purchase of a Tractor. On 2-3-1971, respondent No. 3 authorised the Bank to make payment of the loan amount to M/s. Jacksin Auto Engineers, G.T. Road, Ludhiana-I. Invoice issued by the authorised firm had been supplied to the petitioner by respondent No. 3. On the basis of the authority letter of respondent No. 3, the petitioner delivered the crossed cheque No. 58959 dated 2-3-1971 to M/s. Jacksin Auto Engineers, G.T. Road, Ludhina-I against receipt No. 11006, dated 2-3-1971. The authority letter given by respondent No. 3 had also been signed by two witnesses. The petitioner had also obtained a receipt from respondent No. 3 for the amount of loan. The petitioner claims that the loan amount was misutilised by respondent No. 3. He did not purchase the tractor. The petitioner, therefore, served a registered notice vide letter No. Loan Case/1562/356/PLMB, dated 14-8-1971. This was received by respondent No. 3. He did not, however, bother to reply to the notice, although he paid certain instalments of the loan to the Bank. Thereafter, he defaulted in making the instalments as per the agreement. The petitioner-Bank, therefore, raised the dispute under Section 55 of the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). On receipt of the reference, Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Ropar who acted as the Arbitrator, passed an award against respondent No. 3 on 14-2-1975. Respondent No. 3 filed an appeal against the award. It was accepted. The matter was remanded to the arbitrator for a fresh decision. Respondent No. 3 appeared before the arbitrator and admitted the liability for the repayment of loan. He also gave an undertaking in which he requested for instalments. On the basis of the admission of respondent No. 3, an award was passed in favour of the petitioner. It was held that the petitioner would be entitled to recover the amount with interest through Court as arrears of land revenue or out of the movable/immovable property of the principal loanee or by his arrest. This award was pronounced on 24-5-1982. No appeal was filed against the award of respondent No. 3. Under Section 68 of the Act, the Limitation for filing an appeal is 60 days. Since no appeal had been filed, the award became final. Since respondent No. 3 did not make the repayments of the instalments, a proclamation for the sale of the mortgaged land was issued under Rule 91 of the Punjab Co-operative Land Mortgage Bank s Rules, 1959. The sale was fixed for 16-12-1983. At this stage, respondent No. 3 filed a revision petition No. RPR-35 of 1983 on 14-12-1983 against the award dated 24-5-1982. On the revision petition, the following order was passed :-

"Heard. Notice to the respondents for 20-2-1984. Recovery by way of sale of the land/property of the petitioner stayed meanwhile, Dasti."

4. The respondent-Bank appeared before the appellate authority and raised an objection that the revision petition is not competent, without first exhausting the remedy of appeal. Sin