Dilip Gupta, J. - (1.) The petitioners have sought the quashing of the order dated 13th May, 1992 passed by the Civil Judge, Muzaffarnagar by which the application filed by respondent Nos. 3 to 7 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the compromise decree dated 24th January, 1989 was allowed. The petitioners have also sought the quashing of the order dated 1st December, 1992 by which the Revision that had been filed by the petitioners for setting aside the aforesaid order dated 13th May, 1992 was dismissed.
(2.) The records indicate that Original Suit No. 25 of 1989 had been filed by Ashok Kmar Gupta son of late Sri Anand Prakash and Smt. Geeta Rani wife of Ashok Kumar Gupta against the defendants namely Mahendra Kumar Gupta son of late Anand Prakash, Smt. Krishna Kumari wife of Mahendra Kumar Gupta, Satish Kumar Gupta son of late Anand Prakash, Smt. Shashi Prabha wife of Satish Kumar Gupta and Smt. Shakuntala Devi widow of late Anand Prakash for declaration in which 16th February, 1989 was fixed for filing written statement and 27th February, 1989 was fixed for framing of issues. However, even before the date fixed for filing the written statement arrived, a compromise application was filed on 24th January, 1989 and the suit was decreed on 24th January, 1989 in terms of the compromise.
(3.) Subsequently, an application dated 23rd April, 1991 was filed by Smt. Shakuntala Devi, defendant No. 5 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the aforesaid compromise dated 24th January, 1989 and the decree passed on the said compromise. In the said application she stated that she had filed Original Suit No. 320 of 1991 against Mahendra Kumar Gupta and others with the allegations that the house in dispute was the joint Hindu family property and even though partition had not taken place, defendant Nos. 1 and 2 had illegally sold their shares to one Pawan Kumar and wanted to give possession. An objection was raised by defendant Nos. 1 and 2 that compromise had taken place on 24th January, 1989. Smt. Shakuntala Devi, therefore, stated in the application filed under Section 151, C.P.C. in Original Suit No. 25 of 1989 that such a compromise came to her knowledge for the first time when she made inspection and in fact no compromise had taken place and that she had not engaged any counsel and neither she had signed the compromise application. According to her the said compromise had been obtained by fraud and misrepresentation. This application was allowed by the order dated 13th May, 1992. A Revision was filed by Ashok Kumar Gupta for setting aside this order but the Revision was dismissed by the learned Additional Civil Judge by order dated 1st December, 1992.;