Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 996 2004 SLD 996 2004 SCMR 781
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Miscellaneous Applications Nos. 1261 to 1265 of 2002 in Civil Appeals Nos.634 to 638 of 2000, decision dated: 24-07-2002
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY AND ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, JJ
Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. Muhammad Akram, Advocate on-Record for Petitioners (in.C.M.As. Nos. 1261 to 1265 of 2002). Nemo for
Respondent

ALI BROTHERS and others

VS

Miss NAUSHABA JABEEN

Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-----S. 12(2) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3) Decision of appeal on basis of compromise Application under S.12(2), C.P.C., on the ground that other counsel who appeared on behalf of petitioner had no authority from his Advocate on Record to enter into compromise -Validity Advocate on Record engaged by petitioner was not present on the date of hearing No affidavit or other statement of Advocate on¬ Record was appended with such application to the effect that he never gave authority to other counsel to settle matter through compromise No affidavit of other counsel was filed to the effect that he was expressly debarred by Advocate on Record from entering into any compromise ¬Such application had been filed after a period of more than one year, when time granted to petitioner to vacate premises was about to expire One of the tenants/appellants on Court question admitted that other counsel was given traveling expenses for appearance before Supreme Court on the date, when appeal was decided No case was made out for interference in based on compromise ¬Application under S.12(2), C.P.C., was dismissed as having no merits. ORDER By this common order, we propose to decide Civil Miscellaneous Applications Nos.1261 to 1265 of 2002 as questions of law and facts are identical in all of them. 2. Through order dated 1 6 2001, civil appeals filed by the petitioners were disposed of on the basis of the compromise arrived at between their learned counsel and the learned counsel for the respondent. These applications have been made under section 12(2), C.P.C. alleging that Mr. H.A. Rehmani, Advocate Supreme Court who appeared on behalf of the petitioners had no authority or instructions from the petitioners' Advocate on Record to enter into a compromise. It was also alleged that the said learned counsel for the petitioners had colluded with the other party and unauthorizedly entered into a compromise and obtained order dated 1 6 2001 in the appeals. 3. Mr. Akhlaq Ahmad Siddiqui, Advocate on Record was engaged by the petitioners but he was not present on the said date when the appeals came up for…
🔒
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