instituted on behalf of the Durga, for a declaration that the decrees in the two previous suits in the First Appellate Court and in second ... suit properties and his right to possession, were really fraudulent and collusive decrees, obtained by collusion between the plaintiff and the then representative
above were not collusive decrees and they were valid decrees and that the plaintiff without praying for setting aside the decrees within the time prescribed ... Podhu. The question for consideration is whether the said decrees can be said to be collusive and fraudulent ones, having regard to the stand taken
agreement has not been marked as a document. The Court has merely
decreed the suit on the ground that the second respondent/ defendant
has submitted ... done, the Courts will be used by parties to obtain collusive decrees.
17. This Court has absolutely no hesitation to interfere with the
judgment
respondents, in creating such collusive agreement collusively suffering decrees to be passed in the three suits and again collusively suffering the sale deeds ... their individual assets. The decrees obtained in the Courts are collusive decrees. The sale transactions are collusive. Because of the voluntary acts on the part
that she in order to benefit her sister defendant 3 got the decrees-against the estate of Kumaraswami Mudali assigned over to her. There ... fraud. It is difficult to believe that the widow consented to collusive decrees and got her daughter defendant 2 to take assignments of all those
District Munsif's Court, Tindivanam, and other decrees are collusive decrees. That suit was resisted by the respondent in relation to the decree obtained ... ground that the decree obtained by her was neither collusive nor fraudulent and this plea was accepted and the suit
2011 partition deeds or obtained collusive
decrees of the Court between 20 December 2004 and 8
September 2005 to deprive daughters of their rights
subsequently the said suit was decreed on 29.2.84. R.Shanmugam has also filed the suit in O.S.5672 of 1983 against the said Ramesh ... also supported by valid consideration and the said suit was decreed collusively and the decree was registered in the office of Sub-Registrar in Document
might be
colluding with the 1st defendant. Collusion is not something unknown in
litigation, neither are collusive decrees. For the mere fact that one party
such original title deeds, the proposed accused appears
to have obtained collusive decrees and attempted to strengthen its claim
over the property, which is situated
