Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: .96(3) , 3

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S.96(3)---Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972), S.3---Appeal against consent order/decree---Maintainability---Consent order passed in a miscellaneous application filed under S.151, C.P.C. by High Court in its original jurisdiction-- High Court appeal against such consent order is not maintainable by virtue of S.96(3), C.P.C. Lal v. Siddiq and others P L D 1961 (W.P.) Lah. 823; Races Ahmed v. Mian Abdul Jabbar and another P L D 1972 Lah. 711; Muhammad Aslam v. Member Board of Revenue (Settlement and Rehabilitation Wing)/Chief Settlement Commissioner and 6 others P L D 1980 S C 45 and Sirajuddin v. Muhammad Yousuf and others 1982 S C M R 539 ref. Z.U. Ahmed for Appellants. Abdul Rauf for Respondents. Date of hearing: 22nd August, 1989. ORDER ALLAHDINO G. MEMON, J.--Mr. Z.U. Ahmed, submits that he has already presented the Prize Bonds to the State Bank of Pakistan for receiving the prize Money. This application by consent is, therefore, disposed of in the following terms:- "Mr. Z.U. Ahmed has delivered the Prize Bonds to the State Bank of Pakistan to receive the prize money declared in the recent draw on the said Bonds. The Nazir will now collect the Prize Money and keep in his safe custody till such time that Mr. Z.U. Ahmed is able to furnish security to the extent of Rs.2,10,000 towards the said Prize Money. Defendant No. 1, who is said to have presented the said prize Bonds to the State Bank of Pakistan may receive them back from the Bank, according to the rules, after the Prize Money is paid by the Bank to the Nazir pf this Court. Sd/ JUDGE." Feeling aggrieved with the above consent order, the present High Court Appeal has been filed. We have heard Mr. Z.U Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Mr. Abdul Rauf, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, and have also gone   through the documents produced on record. It has been contended by Mr. Z.U Ahmed, learned counsel for the appellants that the consent statement made by him and the learned counsel for the respondent is not properly reflected in the order and the words:- "the question of the disbursement of the amount shall be…