Siddagangaiah thr. LR’s. vs. N.K. Giriraja Shetty thr. LR’s. – (SC)

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908–Order 21, Rule 90–After the rejection of application under Order 21, Rule 90 for want of presence, respondent-plaintiff filed a fresh suit for declaration of title as regard to same property on the ground that he was the bonafide purchaser of property–Dismissal of suit by trial Court on the grounds that the order passed on application under Order 21, Rule 90 remained unchallenged and the suit was barred by the principle of res judicata as well as the provisions of Sec. 52 of T.P. Act–Appreciation of–Filing of fresh suit was barred in view of provisions of Order 21, Rule 92(3) as all the grounds had already been urged in the application–Further, the plaintiff suppressed these facts in suit proceedings and come without clean hands–Further more, first appellate Court and High Court travelled beyond the pleadings to give the findings as regard to fraud or collusion–Provisions of Sec. 52 T.P. Act are applicable in the instant case–Sale was also not bonafide and it was intented to defeat the claim of wife for maintenance–Held, trial Court rightly dismissed the suit–Impugned judgments of first appellate Court and High Court are liable to be set aside.