Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Or. 23, r. 3 A – The appellant- plaintiff, stranger to a Compromise decree, filed suit seeking a declaration that the Compromise decree by the High Court on 15.09.1994 in the second appeal was illegal, inoperative and obtained by fraud and misrepresentation – Held: The appellant was not a party to the stated Compromise decree – He was, however, claiming right, title and interest over the land referred to in a stated sale deed dated 06.01.1984 which was purchased by him from one of the party to compromise decree – It is well settled that the compromise decree passed by the High Court in the second appeal would relate back to the date of institution of the suit between the parties thereto – In the suit now instituted by the appellant, at the best, he could seek relief against the person who sold property to him, but cannot be allowed to question the compromise decree passed by the High Court in the partition suit between the other parties – In other words, the appellant could file a suit for protection of his right, title or interest devolved on the basis of the stated sale deed dated 06.01.1984, allegedly executed by one of the party to the proceedings in partition suit, which could be examined independently by the Court on its own merits in accordance with law – That apart, the Trial Court in any case would not be competent to adjudicate the grievance of the appellant herein in respect of the validity of compromise decree dated 15.09.1994 passed by the High Court in partition suit – It must, therefore, follow that suit instituted before the Civil Court by the appellant was not maintainable in view of specific bar u/r. 3A of Or. 23 CPC – Also, findings were recorded by the Trial Court against the appellant in reference to issue regarding the right, title and interest of suit property and said findings were not interfered by the Court of Appeal preferred at the instance of the appellant – Thus, there were concurrent findings of Courts below against the appellant-plaintiff – Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.