each. Budh Ram, Paramjit
Singh and Santokh Singh, appear to have, in collusion, with officers of
the State Government, be it officers posted with ... sold
land belonging to the Gram Panchayat on the basis of collusive decrees
for injunction, sale deeds and by recording mutations etc. After these
illegal
respondent
5 M.A No.3932/2011
no.4 was decreed on 22.7.2005. Execution proceedings have
been initiated by the respondent no.4 which ... which specifically carves out an exception in respect
of collusive decrees.
13. The learned Senior Counsel for the appellants further
stated that the appellants have
year 1974,
certain persons, posing as proprietors, obtained collusive civil
decrees of ownership, got mutations sanctioned and thereafter sold
the land by way of multiple ... against all such persons, who have obtained collusive decrees, are
beneficiaries of sale deeds and in whose favour revenue officers
have recorded mutations. The needful
contesting opposite parties which he wants to be
vacated. If the decrees in favour of the contesting opposite
parties remain intact, the petitioner’s right ... aside the ex parte decrees which were against the provisions of
law and were the result of collusion and fraud practiced by the
plaintiff
proved the agreement of sale and rightly exercised the discretion and decreed the suit for specific performance. He further contended that though the first respondent ... collusion with the second respondent to defeat the rights of the first respondent and considering the above aspects, the court below has rightly decreed
dismissed while counter claim was decreed.
The plaintiff had lost its suit, and with it, all claims over the decreed property. On
the other hand ... claim of the defendant be decreed. To leave the parties to bear their own costs".
The application betrays collusion and not compromise. In fact
Vinayakamurthi vs T.Mahendran on 18 April, 2013
Author: P.R.Shivakumar
Bench: P.R
prior to 26.1.1950. According to the petitioner, the civil court had already
decreed his claim and the same was binding on the Gram Panchayat.
Respondent ... collusive decree. The mere fact that the Sarpanch admitted ownership of
the petitioner, does not raise an inference of collusion as the Sarpanch
Singh Gurbachan
parties are
always at liberty to get those decrees set aside on the ground of
collusion, fraud etc. or otherwise, by a competent Court. After
trial court has decreed the suit of the plaintiffs declaring
that the sale deeds dated 1.9.1998 and 15.10.1998 are
collusive, bogus, fictitious and not intended ... consequently, the suit has been decreed
declaring that the sale-deeds dated 1.9.1998 and
15.10.1998 are collusive, bogus and fictitious. The third
defendant does
