Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.22 seconds)
Fateh Chand And Anr. vs Narsingh Das And Anr. on 16 May, 1912 cites

Gossain Ramdhan Puri Raj Kumar Thakur ... vs Gossain Dalmir Puri on 20 May, 1909

and in earlier decisions reviewed in the case of Gossain Ramdhan Puri v. Gossain Dalmir Puri 14 C.W.N. 191 at p. 200 : 2 Ind. Cas. 385 that, the propriety of an agreement of this nature can be questioned only by the parties thereto. The first defendant has not contended that the terms upon which the plaintiff undertook to finance him in the earlier litigation were unconscionable and ought not to be enforced in a Court of Equity. The position, therefore, is that as between the first defendant on the one hand and the second and third defendants on the other, the consent decree is valid and binding. As was pointed out in the cases of In re South American and Mexican Company (1895) 1 Ch. 37 : 64 L.J .Ch. 189 : 12 R. 1 : 71 L.T. 594 : 43 W.R. 131, and The Bellcairn 10 Pr. D. 161 : 55 L.J. Adm. 3 : 53 L.T. 686 : 34 W.R. 55 : 5 Asp. M.C. 503, a decree by consent is operative between the parties, so long as it is not set aside in a proper judicial proceeding, in the same manner as if it were a decree upon contest. This principle, however, cannot be applied to the prejudice of a stranger to the decree. The plaintiff is entitled to show that the decree is fraudulent and collusive and does not affect his legal rights.
Calcutta High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 16 - Full Document
1