| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 2065 2023 SLD 2065 = 2023 PLD 344 |
F.A.O. No. 23 of 2020/BWP, decided on 6th April, 2022.
Before Sultan Tanvir Ahmad, J
Khizar Hayat Abbasi for Petitioner. Syed Muhammad Arfa Shahraz Bukhari and Rao Nasir Mehmood for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 5. Ch. Shahid Mehmood, A.A.G. for
Respondents Nos. 6 to 8. Date of hearing: 6th April, 2022.
SOHNEY KHAN and 2 others---Petitioners
VERSUS
GHULAM MUHAMMAD and 8 others---Respondents
Law: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)
Section: 42 , 54 , 1(3) , 3
Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)---
----Ss. 42 & 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXIII, Rr.1(3) & 3---Suit for declaration and injunction---Compromise---Binding effect---Precondition--Earlier suit filed by respondents/plaintiffs was withdrawn unilaterally thereafter they filed instant suit for implementing a promise made by appellant/defendant in earlier proceedings---Trial Court rejected the plaint but Lower Appellate Court set aside the order and remanded the matter to Trial Court for decision afresh---Validity--Statement was given in absence of opponent party and even without any notice on application to withdraw earlier suit---Compromise could become effective only when the two or more parties agreed to settle a real or supposed claim in which each party had surrendered something in concession to each other---Unilateral statement given by respondents/plaintiffs and that too in absence of other side could not be taken as mutual concession or mutual promise, having any binding effect, especially when statement regarding so-called out of court compromise was not backed by any document---Such statement did not fulfill requirements of O. XXIII, R. 3, C.P.C., which necessitated satisfaction of the Court---If such an easy way of escaping restriction contained in O. XXIII, R. 1(3), C.P.C. by simply giving unilateral statement as to compromise was permitted, the very purpose of the provision of O. XXIII, C.P.C., would be negated---High Court set aside the order passed by Lower Appellate Court and restored that of Trial Court---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.
Mst. Yasmeen and another v. Sahib Zarin and 6 others 2013 CLC 1417; Rozi Khan Gojar and another v. Mst. Rehmat Bibi 2004 CLC 466; Ghulam Abbas and others v. Mohammad Shafi through LRs and others 2016 SCMR 1403; Muhammad Yar (deceased) through L.Rs. and others v. Muhammad Amin (deceased) through L.Rs and others 2013 CLC 464; Muhammad Yasin v. Additional District Judge-VII, West, Islamabad and others 2022 MLD 186; Muhammad Shafique and 4 others v. Muhammad Rafique and another 2012 YLR 2801; Qadir Bakhsh v. Saeed Ahmad Qureshi 2015 YLR 89; Basaoo and others v. Jagan Nath and another AIR 1931 Oudh 127; Fazal Maqsood and another v. Mst. Naseem Begum and 3 others 2020 CLC 884 and Ch. Ghulam Rasool v. Mrs. Nusrat Rasool and 4 others PLD 2008 SC 146 rel.