Skip to main content

CONSENT DECREE

 CONSENT DECREE

LAWFUL AGREEMENT OR COMPROMISE

‘Lawful’ means lawful within the meaning of the Contract Act. The agreement should be legal though not specifically enforceable. The word ‘lawful’ occurring in O. 23, R. 3 means an agreement which is legally enforceable. If a compromise decree is a result of an agreement or contract which is void under the Contract Act, the Court is left with no choice but to set aside such a compromise decree in terms of the Explanation to R. 3 of O. 23.

In view of the proviso read with the Explanation, a Court which had entertained the petition of compromise has to examine whether the compromise was void or voidable under the Indian Contract Act. Even R. 1(m) of O. 43 has been deleted under which an appeal was maintainable against an order recording a compromise. As such a party challenging a compromise can file a petition under proviso to Rule 3 of Order 23 or an appeal under Section 96 (1) of the Code, in which he can now question the validity of the compromise in view of R. 1-A of O. 43. The compromise reached should be lawful compromise. By lawful, it means it is not contrary to law, public policy or void ab initio or unlawful, but it cannot include the grounds like fraud, undue influence, coercion, by which the decree can be avoided, considering it to be voidable. Till it is avoided and displaced it can be treated as lawful, for the limited purpose of O. 23, R. 3 of the Code.

VALIDITY OF THE CONSENT DECREE

The validity of the compromise decree would be dependent on the legal validity of the compromise on which it rests. In such circumstances, the Court is required to see whether the compromise in question was lawful and was not void or voidable under the Indian Contract Act. If the compromise itself is fraudulent, then it shall be deemed to be void within the meaning of the Explanation to the proviso of R. 3, and as such, not lawful.


EFFECT OF CONSENT DECREE

As held by the Supreme Court of India although a consent decree does not operate as res judicata but creates an estoppel between the parties and is binding upon them like any other decree. Dealing with the question whether a consent decree is in the nature of a contract, it has been held by a Full Bench of Allahabad High Court that a compromise decree according to general trend of the opinion is creature of an agreement and is subject to all the requirements of such an agreement. It can be set aside of any one of the grounds on which a contract is set aside, as for instance, fraud, mistake and misrepresentation, coercion, undue influence, etc.

CONSENT DECREE DOESN’T OPERATE AS RES JUDICATA

A compromise decree or order does not operate as res judicata because the compromise decree or order is merely the record of a contract between the parties to a suit to which is superadded the seal of the Court and the Court does not decide anything. In Jadu Gopal Chakravarty (Dead) by his Lrs. v. Pannalal Bhowmick and Others, it was stated that, Compromise decree is binding upon parties and unless set aside, it operates as an estoppel. So, the principle of res judicata is not applicable in case of the decree passed by the Court under the compromise between the parties. However, such decree is binding on the parties on the basis of “Principle of Estoppel”.


Consent Decree by Velanati Jyothirmai @ Lex Cliq
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Understanding Counterclaims: A Comprehensive Guide

  Understanding Counterclaims: A Comprehensive Guide In legal proceedings, a counterclaim is a vital tool that allows defendants to assert their own claims against the plaintiff. This strategic maneuver not only defends against the plaintiff's allegations but also enables defendants to seek their own relief. In this comprehensive guide, we delve into the intricacies of counterclaims, exploring their purpose, procedures, and implications in various legal contexts. Introduction to Counterclaims Definition A counterclaim is a legal claim brought by a defendant against the plaintiff in response to the plaintiff's initial complaint. It serves as a means for defendants to assert their own rights, defenses, or causes of action arising from the same transaction or occurrence as the plaintiff's claim. Purpose The primary purpose of a counterclaim is to allow defendants to present their side of the story and seek appropriate remedies or relief. By filing a counterclaim, defendants ca...
7 comments
Read more

Title: Understanding "Your Complaint has been Disposed under a Closed Complaint"

  Title: Understanding "Your Complaint has been Disposed under a Closed Complaint" When you receive a notification stating "Your complaint has been disposed under a closed complaint," it signifies the closure of the complaint you filed with the respective entity or organization. This phrase is commonly used by customer service departments, grievance redressal cells, regulatory bodies, or complaint management systems to inform complainants about the resolution status of their complaint. Here's a detailed explanation of what it means and its implications: Disposition of Complaint (0-7 days) : "Disposed" indicates that the complaint has been addressed, reviewed, and resolved by the concerned authority or entity. The closure of the complaint signifies that the responsible party has taken appropriate action to address the issues raised in the complaint. Closure Status (0-7 days) : "Closed complaint" indicates that the complaint resolution process ...
6 comments
Read more

The Doctrine of Alternative Danger

  THE DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE DANGER Although the plaintiff is supposed to be cautious in spite of the defendant’s Negligence, there can also be certain situations when the plaintiff is justified in taking some threat where some unsafe state of affairs has been created by way of the defendant. The plaintiff may appear as puzzled or worried through a hazardous state of affairs created via the defendant and to store his man or woman or property, or now and again to store a third party from such danger, he may take a choice risk. The law, therefore, lets in the plaintiff to come across a choice danger to shop by himself from the chance created via the defendant. If the path adopted by him results in some harm to himself, his motion in opposition to the defendant will now not fail. The judgment of the plaintiff, however, is not rash. The position can be defined by means of the case of Jones v . Boyce . In that case, the plaintiff used to be a passenger in the defendant’s train and inst...
16 comments
Read more