BARAT BHUSHAN SURI Vs. KASHI NATH TICKOO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FRAUD avoids all judicial acts, ecclesiastical or temporal ' observed Chief Justice Edward Coke of England about three centuries ago. It is the settled position of law that a judgment or decree obtained by playing fraud on the Court is a nullity and non est in the eyes of law. Such a judgment/decree by the first Court or by the highest court - has to be treated as a nullity by every court, whether superior or inferior. It can be challenged in any court even in collateral proceedings '. The aforesaid observations were made by Hon 'ble the Supreme Court in the case of S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath and ors, (1994)1 SCC 1. Similar observations have been made subsequently by Hon 'ble the Supreme Court in the case of State of Chhattisgarth and ors v. Dhirjo Kumar Sengar, (2009) 13 SCC 600 and Ganpatbhai Mahijibhai Solanki v. State of Gujarat and ors, (2008) 12 SCC 353.

(2.) THE difficult times in the life of a society and a community expose the characteristics of a person which remains covered during the normal or prosperous time. The turmoil in the State has caused wounds to the local but has also exposed the characters of some persons. This case presents a classical example of such an exposure.

(3.) THERE was one Pt. Shiv Ji Tickoo who was father of Kashi Nath Tickoo, Dwarka Nath Tickoo and Rajnath Tickoo. They were owners of plot nos. 109, 110 and 111 situated at main Bazar Pahalgam. One Kashi Nath Suri (father of appellant Bharat Bhushan Suri) was tenant in respect of shops built on those plots. During the turmoil in the State one mysterious person Sahib Ji Koul purported to have filed an application, acting as an attorney of Kashi Nath Tickoo, Dwarka Nath Tickoo and Raj Nath Tickoo which is shown to have resulted in passing of a fabricated order by the District Magistrate Anantnag on 27.11.2006, which has been put under spot by the appellant as a fabricated document.