Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeals, Declares Preliminary Decree in Partition Suit Not Vitiated by Fraud

04 September 2024 9:44 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court dismissed a series of appeals and declared that the preliminary decree in a partition suit was not vitiated by fraud. The bench comprising of Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Ramasubramanian and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Mithal delivered the judgment on June 15, 2023.

The court emphasized that the High Court erred in declaring the preliminary decree to be vitiated by fraud without sufficient evidence or pleadings. The observations of fraud were confined to specific land and were not binding on the State Government. Quoting from the judgment, the court stated, "The High Court went overboard in holding the preliminary decree to be vitiated by fraud, after the same had attained finality in several proceedings, including those initiated by the State Government."

The appeals arose from various Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) filed by different parties, including Trinity Infraventures Ltd., Sameena Kausar and others, and Fareeduddin Khan and others. The court dismissed these appeals, upholding the validity of the preliminary decree.

Furthermore, the court addressed the issue of the sale deed executed by a power agent after the principal's death. While the appellants questioned the validity of the sale, claiming that the principal was not impleaded in the suit before his demise, the court noted that further verification was required regarding the date of impleadment. Quoting the judgment, the court stated, "Due to lack of specific information on the date of impleadment, final determination on validity cannot be made. Applicant's contention requires further verification."

The court also dismissed an application filed by an Asset Reconstruction Company seeking intervention. The company claimed that public money was at stake due to an equitable mortgage created by deposit of title deeds. However, the court held that the company's previous impleadment applications had been dismissed, and it could not piggyback on appeals filed by others.

Additionally, a Cooperative Housing Society filed an application seeking impleadment and directions in the appeals. The society challenged the High Court's declaration of the preliminary decree as vitiated by fraud. The court dismissed the application, stating that the society's contentions could not be entertained through an application for clarification, as a review petition was already pending.

The Supreme Court's ruling brings clarity to the validity of the preliminary decree in the partition suit and sets a precedent for future cases. The decision affirms the importance of providing sufficient evidence and pleadings before declaring a decree as vitiated by fraud.

Date of Decision: June 15, 2023

M/S TRINITY INFRAVENTURES LTD. & ORS. ETC vs M.S. MURTHY & ORS. ETC.

Latest Legal News