TAQDIR JEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In A.V.Papayya Sastry vs. Govt of A.P. (AIR 2007 SC 1546), the Apex Court observed that the fraud may be defined as an act of deliberate deception with the design of securing some unfair or undeserved benefit by taking undue advantage of another. Even most solemn proceedings stand vitiated if they are actuated by fraud. Fraud is thus an extrinsic collateral act which vitiates all judicial acts, whether in rem or in personam. The principle of 'finality of litigation' cannot be stretched to the extent of an absurdity that it can be utilized as an engine of oppression by dishonest and fraudulent litigants. A judgment, decree or order obtained by playing fraud is a nullity and non est in the eye of law. It can be challenged in any court at any time, in appeal, revision, writ or even in collateral proceedings. The relevant paragraphs 20, 22, and 23 are extracted as under:-

(2.) The decree holder assails the correctness of the concurrent orders passed by the Executing Court as well as the First Appellate Court.

(3.) Some peculiar facts are required to be noticed. Late Smt. Karnail Kaur wife of Sh. Bachan Singh was owner of 96.55 ordinary acres of land. As per the provisions of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. The Collector vide order dtd. 6/8/1962, declared 50.86 ordinary acres of land (15.86 standard acres) as surplus (beyond ceiling limit) after leaving 60 ordinary acres as the permissible area (that is the area under the petitioner's ownership) as per the provisions of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. This order has never been challenged before and it remains final till date. During the consolidation of holdings, late Smt. Karnail Kaur remained in possession of whole of the land including the land which was declared as surplus. Till 1983, the officials of the State of Haryana did not take steps to take over possession of the land which was declared surplus (beyond the ceiling limit). In the meantime, in view of the provisions of the Haryana Sealing of Land Holdings Act, 1972, the land which was declared surplus vested in the State in terms of Sec. 12(3) from the appointed date i.e. 24/1/1971. After declaration of the surplus area, the authorities are required to separately identify and separate the permissible area and the surplus area. On a notice being given, late Smt. Karnail Kaur, on 29/4/1983, provided the list of khasra numbers which she chose to retain as permissible area to the prescribed authority, which was accepted and the remaining area measuring 50.80 ordinary acres was treated as surplus. Subsequently, as per the Rules and the Scheme, some part of the land was allotted to respondent no.7, 9 and 10 on 15/2/1985.