Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

13. In the present case the Court had proceeded against some of the defendants ex parte on the same day and immediately proceeded to pass a decree on the alleged compromise, which definitely prejudicially-affected the rights and contentions of the said defendants. A compromise decree has to be between the parties to the suit and the Court must apply its mind and use its judicial discretion if the case is otherwise. Obviously the suit was being contested by different sets of defendants, and compromise between some of them adversely affecting the rights of another set of defendants, had to be looked into by the Court with caution. Compromise between some of the parties to the suit and prayer for passing of a decree effecting rights of all, the Court had a discretion to accept or reject such a request. In fact in some of the cases where partial compromise would be prejudicial to the interests of the parties not joining such a compromise, the Court has gone to the extent of holding that such compromise cannot be recognised. In this regard reference can be made to Smt. Rani Bai v. Yadunandan Ram, AIR 1969 SC 1118: (1969 All LJ 988) and Gopika Raman Roy v. Atal Singh, AIR 1926 Calcutta 193 (DB).