Law:

Section: 3

(a) Fraud-Vitiates even most solemn transaction. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXIII, r. 3 Compromise of suit-Consent decree Just an agreement between parties-Can be amended by consent of parties. It is an established principle of law that a consent decree is just an agreement between the parties notwithstanding the fact that it has been recorded by and bears the seal of the Court. Therefore, the consent preliminary decree passed in a case, like all other agreements, could be amended by the consent of parties without any objection. Rahmatullah & Sons v. Sheikh Hafizullah P L D 1958 Lah. 451 and Lilaram Kewalram v. Hiranand Notandas and others A I R 1937 Sind 103 distinguished. (c) Debt-Debt, albiet genuine, barred by limitation-Cannot be recovered through action in Court. (d) Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 19-Acknowledgment Commissioner appointed by Court to examine accounts stating certain debt/claim as genuine-Such report not an acknowledg ment within meaning of S. 19. Mahalakshmibai v. Firm of Nageshwar Purshotam I L R 10 Bom. 71 fol. (e) Limitation Act (IX of 1940), Ss. 19 and 21(2) read with Partnership Act (IX of 1932), S. 19(2)(e)-Acknowledgment by one partner without implied authority to admit debt/claim-Binding against such-partner only and not against partnership firm-Plaintiff acting as Receiver appointed by Court making admission of claim and entering same in accounts book-Defendants (other partners of firm) charging plaintiff with fraud in respect of such claim even before his appointment as Receiver-Held : though plaint ff, in circumstances, possessed all powers of Receiver under Civil Pro cedure Code, yet acknowledgment would be binding against him only and not against partnership firm. A I R 1952 Mad. .136; A I R 1958 'Pb. 341; A I R 1957 Trven, 159; B. Adya Prasad Singh v. Lal Girish Bahadur Pat A I R 1933 All. 364; Gulsaran Das v. Brijmohan and others A I R 1939 Lah. 397; Pahu Mal Nathu Mal v. Chunilal and others A I R 1929 Lah. 266; Boochi v. Bohre Nathi Ram and others I L R 1932 All. 51 and A I R 1962 Cal. 115 distinguished. Mahalakshmibai v. Firm of Nageshwar Purshotam I L R 10 Bom. 71; A I R 1960 Born. 424; 1959 Mad.…