Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: SANTHAPURAM VENKIAH VS Respondent: SANTHAPURAM UMAKRIPA DUTT alias UMAPATHIHonorable Justice Lord Uthwatt
P L D 1947 Privy Council 222
P L D 1947 Privy Council 222
Present: Lord Uthwatt, Lord Oaksey and Sir John Beaumont
SANTHAPURAM VENKIAH and another-Appellants
Versus
SANTHAPURAM UMAKRIPA DUTT alias UMAPATHI and others-Respondents
Privy Council Appeal No. 99 of 1945, decided on 4th Decem ber 1947, from Hyderabad Deccan.
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 100-Finding of fact--Compromise-Courts in India found that compromise was vitiated by fraud of appellant-Plea of appellant was that there was no evidence of fraud-Facts showing that compromise could not stand-Inference of fraud be disregarded-Appeal should be dismissed.
JUDGMENT
LORD UTHWATT.'-In this case both the Courts in India have held that the compromise, the validity of which is in issue, was vitiated by the fraud of the appellant. Before their Lordships, the appellant sought to establish that there was no evidence to support the finding of fraud. Their Lordships find it unnecessary to express any opinion on this point, for, taking into review only the facts as to which there is no dispute and disregarding the inference of fraud, it is abundantly clear that the compromise cannot stand.
Their Lordships will humbly advise His Majesty that this appeal be dismissed.
K. M. A. Appeal dismissed.