Partition thr. compromise fraud decree by misrepresentation
G.D GEMINI
(Querist) 16 September 2012
This query is : Resolved
RESPECTED SIRS
NILAMBER AND GHANHAM REAL BROTHERS WERE OWNERS OF 8 PROPERTIES JOINTLY AND INDIVIDUALLY.THESE PROPERTIES WERE IN THE NAME OF THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS. TO SAVE/EVADE STAMP DUTY ON SALE DEED NILAMBER FILE A CULISIVE SUIT FOR PARTITION STATING PROPERTY PURCHASED BY HUF FUNDS (WHILE ALL IS SELF AQUIRED) AND BY MISREPRESENTATION GOT DECREE VIDE A COPROMISE DEED SUBMITTED TO THE COURT IN THE YEAR NOV.2000 . A LIST OF 8 PROPERTY WAS ALSO SUBMITTED WITH THE SUIT BUT NILAMBER BY WAY OF FRAUD ONE PROPERY OF KAMAL S/O GHANSHAM ALSO MENTIONED IN COPROMISE WHICH IS EXCLUSIVELY PURCHSSED BY KAMAL. ON GOODFAITH IN BROTHER GHANSHAM & HIS OTHER FAMILY MEMERS PUT THEIR SIGNATURES ON COMPROMISE KAMAL'S SIGN WAS DONE BY NILAMBER TO COMPLETE FORMALITIES. IN COURT STATEMENT OF GHANSHAM AND HIS ONLY ONE SON WERE RECORED AND NOT OF OTHER MEMBERS.
IN THAT COMPROMISE 6 PROPERTIES CAME IN NILAMBER'S FAVOUR AND 3 IN FAVOUR OF GHANSHAM. NILAMBER GOT MUTATION IN REVENUE RECORDS ALSO WITHOUT INFORMATION TO HIS BROTHER.
IN 2006 GHANSHAM CAME TO KNOW ABOUT FRAUD BUT DUE TO HIS SIGNATURE FELF SHOCK. THEN KAMAL FILED A SUIT CHALLANGING THAT DECREE OBTAINED BY WAY OF FRAUD WITH COURT & MISREPRESNTATION AMD REQUESTED FOR SET ASIDE ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:
1. PROPERTY IS NOT ANCESSTRAL BUT SELF
AQUIRED.
2. KAMAL'S PROPERTY IS NOT MENTIONED IN
PLAINT BUT MENTIONED IN COPROMISE ONLY
3. KAMAL'S SIGNATURES ARE TOTALLY BOGUS
4. STATEMENTS OF ALL THE PARTIES WERE NOT
RECORDED IN THE COURT
5. AFTER DECREE DT. NOV.2000 NILAMBER
EXECUTED SALE DEED OF TWO PROPERTIES
IN FAVOUR OF GHANSHAM (AS PER VERBAL
CONTRACT GHANSHAM CLEARLY ASKED
NILAMBER THAT HE DID NOT HAS FAITH IN
SUCH DECREE AND HE WILL ACCEPT SALE
DEED ONLY FOR THE PROPERY CAME IN HIS
FAVOUR WHICH WERE IN THE NAME OF
NILAMBER) NOW CASE IS PENDING ONLY FOR THE PROPERTIES CAME IN NALAMBER FAVOUR
NOW CASE IS AT ARGUMENTS STAGE WHILE AS PER ADVOCATE CASE IS STROG ACCORDING TO DOCUMENTRY AND VERBAL EVIDENCE. THE OTHER PARTY PRESSING THE SUIT IS NOT MANTANABLE AND TIME BARRED.
KINDLY SUGGEST YOUR ADVICE ON ABOVE POINTS AND ALSO ABOUT LIMITATIONS.
REGDS
G.D GEMINI
ajay sethi
(Expert) 16 September 2012
it is necessary to go through the averments made in plaint , the compromise decree entered into between parties . if you are able to show that decree was obtained by fraud court will set aside the decree .
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 16 September 2012
take help of local lawyer.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 16 September 2012
Decree based on fraud is no decree and you can file a fresh case for declaration of the decree as null and void.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 16 September 2012
No fresh suit now lies.A miscellaneous case in same suit is the solution.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 16 September 2012
The suit is definitely very strong filed by Kamal as he was never party to the compromise and his signature has been forged. Even his property was not under discussion as it was not mentioned in the plaint so the suit is really good one and your lawyer should strongly prepare his argument.
G.D GEMINI
(Querist) 17 September 2012
DEAR SIR ,
PLEASE ONE QUESTION.GIVE ME ANSWER.
AGAR KISI KO BINA VAJAH HARASMENT KIYA JATA HAI TO KIS RULE KE TAHAT KESH FILE KIYA JAYEGA
WITH REGDS.
