TRILOK SINGH Vs. SHEETAL MUND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant in the present first appeal is a defendant in a suit being O.S. No.142 of 2018, "Smt. Sheetal Vs. Trilok Singh". In the suit, thus, instituted by the respondent/plaintiff, herein, the parties to the suit had entered into a compromise on 25.10.2018, which was duly verified, as per the provisions contained under Order 23 Rule 3 of the CPC, and based on the said compromise, which was voluntarily entered into between the parties to the suit, consequently the suit was decided in terms of the compromise vide its judgment and decree dated 25.10.2018, which was passed in O.S. No.142 of 2018"Smt. Sheetal Vs. Trilok Singh", which is under challenged in the present appeal.

(2.) On the institution of the appeal before this Court on 19.08.2020, the Registry of this Court had reported that the appeal is delayed by 574 days. On the delay condonation application, notices were issued to the respondent, who has put in appearance and had filed her objections to the delay condonation application.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant, as per the contentions raised in the delay condonation application, had submitted that at the time when the compromise was entered into between the parties on 25.10.2018, though it bears his signatures, but he was not in a sound mental state of mind to understand its contents, and on account of the alleged wrongful confinement made by the plaintiff/respondent. Hence, his argument is limited to the extent that the compromise was obtained by playing a fraud and thus has giving challenge to the compromise decree, in the present first appeal, at a later stage, with the delay of 574 days, would grant her the latitude to override the embargo created by sub-section (3) of Section 96 of the CPC, for the reason being that the fraud vitiates an order or a decree.