SHIVALINGAPPA APPAYYA HALAGI Vs. INDUMATI BHIMAPPA TELI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant challenges the order passed on an application under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'cpc' for brevity) seeking review of an order recording a compromise dated 25-9-1992 in F. D. P. 10/90.

(2.) THE appellant was the plaintiff in O. S. No. 22/85 which was a suit for partition and separate possession, of a share in the joint family properties. Respondent No. 1 was defendant No. 7 in the said suit. She had engaged counsel and filed written statement. A preliminary decree was passed as on 28-2-1990 in favour of the appellant No. 1 herein. The same was challenged in an appeal before this Court in R. F. A. 239/90 which was allowed by a judgment dated 7-9-1990. Thereafter, the appellant had filed f. D. P. 10/90 before the trial Court.

(3.) THE respondent No. 1 had entered appearance through counsel. It is the case of respondent No. 1 that without her knowledge, the alleged power of attorney holder has represented her in a compromise petition, which was entertained and a compromise recorded as on 25-9-1992 in the F. D. P. proceedings. The application having been filed in the year 1994, alleging that she was not a party to the compromise petition and there was no authority granted by her in favour of any person to act on her behalf in the said compromise petition, the trial Court having examined the pleadings and evidence on behalf of the parties, has held that an application under Section 151, CPC was maintainable to review the compromise order and to re-open the F. D. P. proceedings and on facts, has found that the allegations of respondent No. 1 as to the power of attorney being a false document, on the basis of which she was represented in the compromise petition, and has accordingly allowed the application.