| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2012 SLG 636 2012 SLD 636 2012 CLC 1526 |
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No.842 of 2010, decision dated: 10-02-2012
MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Revision No.842 of 2010, decision dated: 10-02-2012
MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
JANAT GUL and 4 otherss
VS
HABIB-UR-RAHIM and another
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: O. XXI,R. 1,2,23A
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------O. XX, R. 18(2), O. XXI, Rr. 1, 2 & 23-A---Suit for possession through partition---Dismissal of appeal filed against preliminary decree---Defendant's application seeking dismissal of plaintiff's application for passing of final decree by Trial Court on the ground that parties after dismissal of appeal, had effected a compromise outside court through intervention of elders of locality, whereunder plaintiff had received his due share in disputed house---Dismissal of defendant's application by Trial Court and Appellate Court refusing to accept such compromise---Validity---Compromise deed signed and thumb-marked by many persons of locality was required to be proved to achieve ends of justice by allowing parties to lead pro and contra evidence---Trial Court had committed an irregularity by not providing chance to defendant to prove such compromise---Court could adopt a suitable way just to secure ends of justice and decide controversy between parties once for all---Court in case of frivolous objection/defence could impose compensatory costs or could get undertaking from party regarding compliance of decree in case of failure of his objection---High Court set aside impugned orders and allowed the defendant to produce evidence within a month positively after giving undertaking to Trial Court that in case of his failure to do so, he would have to pay the decretal amount in lump sum and hand over possession of 1/2 share in disputed house without fail. Mian Hussain Ali for Petitioners. Abdul Halim Khan for Respondents. Date of hearing: 10th February, 2012. JUDGMENT MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J.--- The petitioners being judgment-debtors have filed instant revision petition, whereby they have questioned the concurrent findings of the two Courts below whereby their objections/application for dismissal of execution petition was dismissed vide order dated 5-12-2009 and vide a separate even dated order, the application for final decree of the respondent/decree-holders was allowed and their two separate appeals against the above two orders were also dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge-II/Izafi Zilla Qazi, Swat vide his…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492