Law:

Section:

AJK Interim Constitution Act, 1974 (VIII of 1974)-- ----S. 44--Civil Procedure Code, (V of 1908), S. 12(2), Limitation Act, (IX of 1908), Ss. 5 & 14 & Art. 184--Compromise decree was nullity in eye of law for having been procured through fraud and deception--No detail of fraud and forgery was given in suit--Legality and propriety of compromise decree was challenged--No locus standi--Limitation can be condoned if sufficient cause was shown by a party--Vested right cannot be snatched by exercising discretion in an unwarranted manner and against settled position of law--Question of--Whether application filed on behalf of respondent was time barred--Validity--In compromise decree, petitioners had not impleaded as party, therefore, they being stranger can avail remedy provided by law under Section 12(2) of CPC--Where a party has chosen a wrong forum then he cannot say that prosecution on his behalf was in good faith and he was entitled to condonation of delay under Sections 5 & 14 of Limitation Act--ASJ was not competent to extend benefit of choosing wrong forum to plaintiffs/respondents, had traveled beyond statutory law--No limitation fixed by legislature for moving Court for setting aside a decree obtained through fraud and deception under Section 12(2) of CPC--Art. 181 of Limitation Act, would be applicable which provides 3 years limitation to an aggrieved person from date when he got knowledge about such a decree or --Negligence of a litigant can be condoned when his conduct has not wasted any time when it was brought into his knowledge that he has chosen a wrong forum--Time so consumed can be extended under Section 14 of Limitation Act, if forum was chosen with care and caution but in case of gross negligence no such condonation can be ordered. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)-- ----S. 11, O. II, R. 2--Principle of resjudicata--Suit for challenging decree or on basis of fraud and provides speedy remedy for cancellation of decree--Validity--Suit was rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC and was not on merits, therefore, neither provisions contained in Section 11 nor Order II Rule 2 of CPC are attracted in instant case. Civil Procedure Code,…