A Person Who Was Not A Party To Compromise Decree Is Entitled To File Independent Suit To Set Aside Compromise Decree: Karnataka HC
The Karnataka High Court held that a person who was not a party to compromise decree is entitled to file an independent suit to set aside the compromise decree.
A petition was filed before the Dharwad Bench of the Court under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) against the order of the Senior Civil Judge by which the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC was dismissed by the Trial Court.
A Single Bench of Justice C.M. Poonacha observed, “It is clear that in the present case the plaintiff not being a party to OS No.152/2021 and the compromise in the said suit was not recorded after complying with Rule 3B of Order XXIII of the CPC is entitled to file the suit. The Trial Court has considered the application and held that the plaintiff has pleaded about the compromise in OS No.101/2021 and having regard to the fact that the plaintiff was not a party to the earlier suit and since he was not allotted a share, has dismissed the application filed by defendant No.5.”
Advocate Chetan Munnoli appeared for the petitioner while Advocate S A Sondur appeared for the respondents.
Facts of the Case -
The plaintiff instituted a suit for partition and separate possession. One of the defendants entered appearance in the said suit and contested the case of the plaintiff. The said defendant filed an application under Order VII Rules 11(a) and (b) of the CPC to reject the plaint as barred by law. The said application was opposed by the plaintiff and the Trial Court dismissed it. Being aggrieved, the petition was filed.
The High Court in the above context noted, “In view of the discussion made above, the petitioner – defendant No.5 has failed in demonstrating that the order passed by the Trial Court is liable to be interfered with and the relief sought in IA.No.4 before the Trial Court is liable to be granted. Hence, the question framed for consideration is answered in the negative.”
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the revision petition.
Cause Title- Mahesh v. Ishwar & Ors.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate Chetan Munnoli
Respondents: Advocates S A Sondur and L T Mantagani.
