SC rules order obtained by fraud is null

New Delhi, Mar 18 (UNI) The Supreme Court has held that any order obtained by playing fraud on a court is a nullity and non-est in the eyes of law.

The ruling was handed down by a bench comprising Justices C K Thakker and Lokeshwar Singh Panta while dismissing the appeal of some landowners against the judgement of Andhra Pradesh High Court dated April 27, 2000 directing the authorities under the Urban Land(ceiling and regulation) Act 1976 to complete proceedings within the stipulated period.

The petitioner A V Papayya Sastry and others had misled the high court in connivance with the officers of Visakhapatnam Port Trust that the physical possession of their land had been taken by the port authorities on August 29, 1972 under the Land Acquisition Act while the true fact was that the authorities did not take physical possession of the land measuring 18 acres and 39 cents of village Kancharapalem, district Visakhapatnam.

The false statement was given by the appellants to escape the proceedings under Land Ceiling Act.

The high court when informed of the false statement ordered a CBI inquiry and the investigation confirmed the fraud. The High Court initiated suo motu proceedings to recall its orders which were obtained by playing fraud on the court.

The apex court while brushing aside the objections of the petitioners that the decade old order had already attained finality said, "In fraud one gains at the loss of another.

Even most solemn proceedings stand vitiated if there are actuated by fraud.

Fraud is thus an extrinsic collateral act which vitiates all judicial acts whether in rem or in personam.

The principal of finality of litigation cannot be stretched to the extent of an absurdity that it can be utilised as an engine of operation by dishonest and fraudulent litigant." The court concluded its March 7, 2007 judgement by observing that the apex court was not a court of regular appeal or a court of error and this court only intervenes where justice, equity and good conscious require such intervention and its limit when it chases injustice, is the sky.

The apex court dismissed the appeal with costs and upheld the high court judgement. The land was allegedly acquired by port authorities for a public purpose of constructing quarters for its employees.

UNI