(a) Rule 7 of Order 32 lays down that no next friend or guardian for the suit shall, without the leave of the court expressly recorded in the proceeding, enter into any agreement or compromise on behalf of a minor with reference to the suit in which he acts as next friend or guardian. [O. 32, R. 7 (1)].
An application for leave under sub-rule (1) shall be accompanied by an affidavit of the next friend or the guardian for the suit, as the case may be, and also if the minor is represented by a pleader, by the certificate of the pleader, to the effect that the agreement or compromise proposed is, in his opinion for the benefit of the minor. [O. 32, R. 7 (1-A)].
But the opinion so expressed, whether in the affidavit or in the certificate, shall not preclude the court from examining whether the agreement or compromise proposed is for the benefit of the minor. [O. 32, R. 7(2)].
Image Source: clarkstonlegal.com
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Any such agreement or compromise entered into without leave of the court so recorded shall be voidable against all parties other than the minor.
In order that a compromise in which a minor is a party may be valid, the following are the requirements which must be followed:
1. The next friend or guardian ad litem must apply to the court for leave to enter into the proposed compromise setting forth the terms of the compromise;
ADVERTISEMENTS:
2. Granting of leave by the court to compromise by exercising a judicial discretion as to the propriety of the proposed compromise in the ‘interest of the minor;
3. The consent of the next friend or guardian to the proposed compromise after the leave is granted.
(b) There is no appeal from a consent decree. [S. 96 (3)].
(c) The minor can have it set aside in a regular suit by alleging fraud or concealment of material facts or by alleging that the compromise was entered into and sanctioned under a misapprehension of material facts.