In Brief
This case concerns whether a High Court can set aside a consent decree based on allegations of fraud raised years later, after the mortgaged property has been sold in a court auction with the sale confirmed and a sale certificate issued. The original plaintiff obtained a consent decree in 1995 for Rs 2,50,000 against borrowers who had mortgaged property. When execution proceedings followed, the judgment debtors alleged fraud in the decree, but the Executing Court overruled these objections in 1998 after finding no evidence. The property was then auctioned in 1999 and sold with a registered certificate. Only in 2001, the judgment debtors challenged the decree again, and the High Court set it aside based on a later report. The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in reopening the settled decree long after the sale finality. Fraud must be proved with evidence when alleged; the auction purchaser was protected by the sale's finality; and proper appellate procedures were not followed. The Court allowed the appeals and restored the decree and auction sale."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.