The court observed that the appellant was not bound by the decree of
compromise and consent judgment as both the decree and record
showed that the appellant was not part of the decree and had not
personally signed on it.
The court observed that though the appellant had pleaded some
particulars of fraud and misrepresentation, he had failed on the evidence
adduced to prove either fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the respondent.
The evidence adduced proved that he contributed money to his Archdiocese/diocese
to enable the diocese purchase shares. The court held that the appellant was entitled
to disinvestment of the amount calculated.
The appeal partly succeeded.