MUHAMMAD SABIR versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
The application under section 12 (2) and AXXIII, R 3 section 12 (2), the CPC retaining the decision of consent, the trial court upheld the decision of consent against which the public defendants / appeals Was accepted and other defendants filed a lawsuit against the consent decree, which was dismissed. Through the trial court but the appeal was accepted and the case remanded, the forest land was converted into a plaque and transferred to the plaintiff's name, the trial court did not read the documentary evidence, correction of the tax records Was not in the jurisdiction of the case. The civil court was the necessary party to the landlord suit, the appellate court's finding was based on valid reasons for fraudulent and fraudulent orders and fraud questions can be viewed under section 12 (2), CPC, but other questions also have to be resolved. Can be done Under section 12 (2), the CPC was able to set aside the civil suit application, the previous section / s / consent decree. Appeals excluded in unexpected orders \ r \ n
