Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Section: 34(2), 104 , 151

Law: Arbitration Act, 1940

Section: 17, 29 , 41

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)-- ----S. 34(2), 104 & 151--Arbitration Act, 1940 (X of 1940), Ss. 17, 29 & 41--Award was made rule of Court--Execution application--Allowed to extent of decretal amount and dismissed to extent of markup--Decree was silent regarding markup--Decree was not challenged by appellant--Applicability of provisions of CPC--Challenge to--The contention of counsel for appellant that CPC was not applicable to proceedings under Act is not tenable--Section 41 of Act makes provision of CPC applicable to all proceedings, subject to provision of Act and rules made under and would be limited only to extent to which same was not in conflict with provision of Act--After award merged in decree, award becames for all purpose non-existence as a source of title or right between parties and there will, therefore, no longer be any distinction between a decree passed on basis of an award and decree could be passed in term of award that could be executed--The decree was silent in respect of compensation of markup at rate of 9% per annum--The decree was silent with regard to markup in question and it could not be awarded in execution proceedings as court cannot go beyond scope of decree--While passing decree trial Court had not adopted portion of award regarding markup in exercise of its own power under Section on 29 of Act and silence of decree in matter of interest was to be deemed as refused under Section 34 (2) CPC--Besides, decree had not been ht.) challenged by appellant--Appeal dismissed.                                                            [Pp. 152, 153 & 154] A, B, C & D 2015 SCMR 1461 & PLD 1987 SC 393 ref. M/s. Muhammad Masood Khan, Barrister Zahoor Hassan Jamoot and Barrister Atique Muhammad Hassani, Advocates for Appellants. Mr. Naik Muhammad Lehri, Advocate for Respondents. M/s. Anwar Naseem Kasi, DAG and Khushal Khan Kasi, AAG for…