| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 1314 2026 SLD 1314 = 2026 SCP 9 = 2026 PLJ 186 = 2026 SCMR 757 |
C.P.L.A. No. 5071/2025 [Against judgment dated 07.10.2025 passed in C.R.No.80-P of 2017 by Peshawar High Court, Peshawar]
MR. JUSTICE SHAHID BILAL HASSAN MR. JUSTICE SHAKEEL AHMAD
Mr. Hassan Ullah Khan Afridi, ASC
Sohail Islam and another …Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
Saadullah Khan and others …Respondent(s)
Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Section: 1(3),1,2,3
Law: Limitation Act, 1908
Section: 14
Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed a civil petition against the Peshawar High Court's order allowing a revision and dismissing the petitioners' suit challenging a lease deed for a shop in Kohat. The petitioners' father had previously withdrawn an identical suit unconditionally without court permission, barring the subsequent suit under Order XXIII Rule 1(3) CPC. No compromise was recorded judicially, the withdrawal attained finality unchallenged, and the later suit was also time-barred, as confirmed by multiple precedents emphasizing that private settlements not formalized preclude fresh suits on the same cause of action.
Core Points
- Petitioners' father filed an original suit (No. 298/1) challenging the same lease deed, withdrawn unconditionally on 30.05.2009 without permission for a fresh suit; order attained finality.
- Subsequent suit decreed in favor of petitioners at trial and appellate levels but reversed by Peshawar High Court in revision, leading to this Supreme Court petition.
- No compromise placed on judicial record during withdrawal; order stated "dismissed as withdrawn" simpliciter, invoking bar under Order XXIII Rule 1(3) CPC.
- Private arrangements not reflected in court orders treated as unconditional withdrawals, precluding re-litigation per Supreme Court precedents.
- Subsequent suit also barred by limitation; no basis under Section 14 Limitation Act for exclusion of time, as prior suit withdrawn under Order XXIII Rule 1 CPC.
- Petition dismissed: no merit in re-characterizing withdrawal or challenging lease deed after years of delay.
Laws and Sections
| Law/Act | Section/Rule | Key Application |
|---|---|---|
| Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) | Order XXIII Rule 1(3) | Bars fresh suit on same cause of action if earlier suit withdrawn without court permission; applies to unconditional withdrawals simpliciter. |
| Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) | Order XXIII Rule 1 | Governs plaintiff’s right to withdraw suit; sub-rule (3) precludes subsequent suit absent permission. |
| Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) | Order XXIII Rule 2 | In fresh suit (if permitted), plaintiff bound by limitation as if first suit never instituted; Section 14 Limitation Act inapplicable to Rule 1 withdrawals. |
| Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) | Order XXIII Rule 3 | Applies only to recorded compromises; private/unrecorded settlements not recognized judicially. |
| Limitation Act, 1908 | Section 14 | Exclusion of time for prior proceedings requires due diligence, good faith, and jurisdictional defect; not applicable here due to unconditional withdrawal. |
ORDER
SHAHID BILAL HASSAN-J: The instant Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal has arisen out of the judgment dated 07.10.2025 passed by the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in Civil Revision No. 80-P of 2017 filed by Saadullah Khan (“respondent No.1”), whereby the revision petition filed by respondent No.1 was allowed, the concurrent judgments of the Courts below were set aside, and the civil suit instituted by the present petitioners was dismissed.