Court No. - 7
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2375 of 2021 Petitioner :- Tarkeshwar Respondent :- Subas Singh Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailesh Kumar Pathak
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is that once he has denied the compromise to be fair and has claimed it to be an act of fraud and the court did observe that any such allegation is liable to be proved on record, the trial court fell in serious error of law in not framing issue to that effect while issues were framed on that very day. He submits that statement recorded by the petitioner on the basis of compromise is liable to be used against him.
From the perusal of records it clearly transpires that there was no application moved by the petitioner for framing another issue to the effect that the compromise allegedly reached between the parties on 28.03.2009 was an outcome of fraud. From the perusal of order impugned, I find that an application of the petitioner for amendment though rejected but the court has clearly recorded that since petitioner was not supporting the compromise, the suit would be decided on merits. Against this order, revision of petitioner has also come to be dismissed.
It is a fact that the petitioner has denied the compromise dated 28.03.2009 recorded in the order of Civil Judge (Junior Division) while rejecting the amendment but this court finds that the issues were also framed on the date on which alleged compromise was filed.
In such above view of the matter, therefore, the court does not find any prejudice to be caused to any of the parties if any other additional issue is framed regarding allegation of the petitioner that the compromise was an outcome of fraud.
In such above view of the matter, therefore, the petitioner can be granted opportunity to move appropriate application for framing an additional issue than the issue that have already been framed and it is therefore, provided that in case if the petitioner moved any application for framing any additional issue within three weeks regarding compromise dated 28.03.2009 to the effect whether it was an outcome of fraud, the said application shall be considered and disposed of within a further period of 60 days after giving full opportunity of hearing to the defendants in the matter.
With the aforesaid observations and directions this writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 12.8.2021 IrfanUddin