RSA No.1702 of 2007 -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Date of decision: 19.02.2008. Bijender Singh @ Birender Singh ... Appellant Versus Naresh Kumar ... Respondent Present: Mr.RM Singh, Advocate, for the appellant. PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral): The plaintiff is appellant in the suit. He has filed a suit for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction to challenge the decree dated 07.05.1998 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Gurgaon. The main allegations of the plaintiff are that the decree in question has been obtained by fraud, mis-representation and impersonation. According to the appellant-plaintiff, he never suffered a decree. The decree was admittedly passed on compromise/consent. Such a decree can only be challenged by a separate suit in view of the statutory bar under Order 23 Rule 3-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. The remedy of the appellant was to approach the same Court. The appellant-plaintiff has been non-suited on the ground that the decree does not require registration. Even if the plea of the appellant-plaintiff regarding registration of the decree is accepted, he is to be non-suited in view of the provisions of Order 23 Rule RSA No.1702 of 2007 -2- 3-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. No substantial question of law arises. In view of the above, I find no merit in the present appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. 19.02.2008. (PERMOD KOHLI) BLS JUDGE