In Brief
Harjas Rai Makhija purchased a plot through an agreement with Pushparani Jain's attorney. When Pushparani discovered the transaction, she sued to void it, and a decree was passed in her favour in 1999. After multiple failed appeals, Makhija filed a fresh suit alleging fraud. The Supreme Court dismissed his appeal, holding that fraud must be proved with concrete evidence, not merely alleged. A decree upheld through final appellate stages cannot be collaterally attacked years later without specific pleading and substantial proof of fraud with intent to deceive. Makhija's thin evidence could not sustain his claim.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.