Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Section: 3, 1(m), 96(3)

 Summary The petitioners challenged the concurrent findings of the trial court and appellate court, which had held that a compromise decree dated 20.06.2023 was executable. They alleged that the respondent had made unauthorized alterations to the compromise deed before presenting it to the trial court and argued that the execution proceedings were not maintainable because the compromise was reached outside the court. The High Court found that the compromise deed had been duly produced before the trial court, a joint statement of the parties was recorded, and the decree was passed on the basis of that compromise. After reviewing the settled principles governing compromise decrees under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC and relevant precedents, the Court held that a lawful compromise decree has the same force as a decree passed on merits and is executable where it relates to the subject matter of the suit. Since the compromise formed the basis of the decree and no illegality or jurisdictional defect existed in the orders of the courts below, the civil revision petition was dismissed. Tagline A lawful compromise decree recorded by the court is fully executable and carries the same legal effect as a decree passed on merits unless vitiated by fraud, misrepresentation, or jurisdictional defect. ORDER; FARAH JAMSHED, J:-Impugned herein the judgment and order dated 06.02.2026 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-VI, Peshawar. By this order, the appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed, thereby upholding the order 04.12.2024 rendered by the learned Civil Judge-XVI, Peshawar. Briefly, respondent No.1 instituted a suit for declaration, permanent injunction, and possession before the learned Civil Judge, Peshawar. Upon service of summons, the petitioners appeared before the trial court and submitted their written statement, raising both factual and legal objections. During the proceedings, the parties reached a compromise and filed a joint statement, leading the trial court to decree the suit through judgment and decree dated 20.06.2023. The petitioners later alleged that respondent No.1 had made unauthorized alterations in the compromise deed and…