Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court, may be proved
AI Assist
Summary
Any party can challenge a judgment, order or decree that the opponent has proved by showing the earlier court lacked competence or that the decision was obtained by fraud or collusion. It applies when that prior judgment is relevant under sections 40, 41 or 42. If proved, the earlier decision loses its conclusive or binding effect.
Example
Priya is defending a suit where the plaintiff produces a prior decree from another court. Priya shows the earlier court lacked jurisdiction or that the decree was obtained by collusion. If she proves this, the prior decree will not bind the court hearing her case.
Bare Act
Enacted textAny party to a suit or other proceeding may show that any judgment, order or decree which is relevant under sections 40, 41 or 42 and which has been proved by the adverse party, was delivered by a Court not competent to deliver it, or was obtained by fraud or collusion.
Sections 45 to 51 – Opinions of third persons when relevant
Previous year papers
Pick your exam. we'll email the most recent paper.