Case Details

Citation(s)
1982 SLG 371 1982 SLD 371 1982 SCMR 539
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 1258 of 1980, decision dated: 23rd December, 1980. (On appeal from the Order of the Lahore High Court dated 28-7-1.980 in C. R. No. 1274-D of 1980)
KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN AND ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, JJ
Ghulam Mahmood Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondent.

SIRAJ DIN

VS

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF AND OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---S. 96 (3)-Compromise-Advocate duly engaged by petitioner making statement in Court binding petitioner-Suit of petitioner dismissed and decree passed against him in accordance with statement of parties--High Court holding decree to be a consent decree against which no appeal competent and petitioner could not call Advocate "" formerly engaged by him to be not competent to make statement-­" View prevailing with High Court borne out from evidence on record-Petition, held, without merit and dismissed.-[Counsel and client]. ORDER ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.-This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment of Lahore High Court dated 28-7-1980 dismissing peti­tioner's revision application and thereby confirming the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge, Shakargarh, which was upheld, on appeal by the Additional District Judge, Sialkot. By this judgment the Civil Judge dismissed the suit filed by the petitioner and passed a decree against him for Rs. 10,000. The petitioner's suit was for grant of injunction to restrain the respon­dents from interfering in his possession of the Haveli, measuring 3 kanals, 4 marlas, in village Chatrana, Tehsil Shakargarh, District Sialkot. In view of defence plea, question arose whether the suit prop Arty was a graveyard. When the case came up for hearing on 30-6-1979, petitioner's counsel made an offer that he would withdraw the suit in case any dead body was found within the disputed property, and the suit be dismissed and further the petitioner shall pay Rs. 10,000 to the respondents as compensation. The respondents readily accepted this offer, and stated that if no dead body was recovered, the petitioner shall be deemed to be the owner of the disputed property and the suit be decreed in his favour and besides they shall be liable to pay Rs. 10,000 to the petitioner. It was further agreed that Rs. 10,000 shall be deposited in Court by each party by 4-7-1979, and any of the parties failed to do so, then the suit shall be decided against that party and furthermore that party shall be liable to pay Rs. 10,000. Learned trial Judge recorded statements of the parties to the above effect…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492