Compromise decree - party could not be permitted to question the compromise on the ground of fraud or undue influence.

Govindarajan and others v. K.A.N.Srinivasa Chetty and others AIR 1977 MADRAS 402 wherein it is held as follows: "If a compromise was in fact arrived at though it may be voidable at the instance of one of the parties on the ground of fraud or misrepresentation, when the compromise is filed under O.23, R.3 with a request to record the same by the opposite party, the Court could not go into the question of fraud or undue influence. The only ground on which the Court could refuse to record the compromise is on the ground that the compromise itself is opposed to public policy. Therefore the party could not be permitted to question the compromise on the ground of fraud or undue influence.