New Delhi: The Supreme Court has set aside a Telangana High Court order that had rejected, as not maintainable, applications seeking recall of a compromise decree in a partition suit, holding that a decree passed without impleading a necessary party is “a nullity in the eyes of law.”
A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta, allowing the appeal of Geeta Bai and others against K. Arjun Singh and others arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 20008-20010 of 2026, was examining a challenge to the High Court's order dated 28th May, 2025 dismissing three Interlocutory Applications seeking recall of a compromise decree dated 23rd September, 2020, impleadment as proper and necessary parties, and an injunction against alienation of the suit property.
The Court noted that the appellants were the legal heirs of Late Smt. Ballo Bai, daughter of the original propositus, who, by virtue of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as amended by Act 39 of 2005, was “entitled to stake a claim for 1/4th share in the suit schedule property and hence, was undoubtedly a necessary party to the proceedings,” yet had never been impleaded in the partition suit or the subsequent appeal in which the compromise was recorded.
The Court held that the High Court had erred in treating the appellants' remedy as confined to a separate suit or a fresh appeal with leave, and that the compromise decree obtained by the other legal heirs “without impleading Late Smt. Ballo Bai or her legal heirs, despite her being a necessary party . . . was a nullity in the eyes of law.”
Rejecting any suggestion that the appellants were barred under Order XXIII Rule 3A of the CPC, the Court held that they could not “by no stretch of imagination . . . be treated as strangers to the lis,” and were therefore entitled to challenge the compromise and seek recall of a decree obtained behind their back.
Setting aside the impugned order, the Court remitted the three Interlocutory Applications to the High Court for fresh consideration in light of its observations, directed that its earlier interim order dated 27th May, 2026 continue for two weeks, and clarified that this extension would not influence the High Court's independent decision on the stay application.
The parties, along with any third parties who had filed impleadment or intervention applications before the Supreme Court, were directed to appear before the High Court on 5th October, 2026.
Case Title: Geeta Bai & Ors. vs. K. Arjun Singh & Ors.
