1998 PLP 406 (SCMR)
HUSSAIN BIBI and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Mst. AMINA BIBI‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1998 PLP 406 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Zia Mahmood Mirza and Mukhtar Ahmad Junejo, JJ |
| Parties | HUSSAIN BIBI and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Mst. AMINA BIBI‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Supreme Court Rules, 1980‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 406 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Supreme Court Rules, 1980‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 406 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Zia Mahmood Mirza and Mukhtar Ahmad Junejo, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 406 (SCMR) (HUSSAIN BIBI and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus Mst. AMINA BIBI‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Dr. M. Mohy‑ud‑Din Qazi, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Ch. Riasat Ali, Advocate Supreme Court with Special Attorney for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 11th December, 1996.
- Dr. M. Mohy-ud-Din Qazi, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 6‑3‑1996 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in R.S.A. No.513 of 1977). ‑‑‑‑O.XXXIII, R. 6‑‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908); O.XXIII, R. 3‑‑ Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185‑‑‑Compromise during pendency of petition for leave to appeal‑‑‑Parties seeking acceptance of compromise whereby specified area of land was surrendered by plaintiff in favour of defendants and decree in question was to be modified to that extent‑‑‑Decree in respect of remaining land was to remain intact‑‑‑Counsel of both sides had stated that deed of compromise had been signed or thumb‑marked by all the defendants and plaintiff‑‑‑Counsel for parties had also signed compromise deed and on Court's direction vouched for genuineness thereof‑‑‑None of the parties was minor‑‑ Supreme Court accepted compromise and converted petition for leave to appeal into appeal and allowed same in terms of compromise with the result that decree of Trial Court stood modified so as to exclude therefrom specified land which plaintiff had surrendered to defendants‑‑‑Decree with respect to remaining land was to remain intact‑‑‑Specified amount deposited by plaintiff in Trial Court would be paid to defendants.
Judgment & Decree
ZIA MAHMOOD MIRZA, J.
Learned counsel for the parties state that the parties have entered into a compromise, terms whereof have been reduced into writing in the form of an Agreement which is appended with the application under Order XXXIII rule 6 of Supreme Court Rules seeking the compromise to be accepted. The application has not been registered. Office is directed to formally register it. The terms of compromise are stated in the application and the same are reproduced hereunder:-- (i) The respondents/plaintiffs have agreed to surrender of Killa No.20 of Sq.No.16 land measuring 4 Kanals and 7-1/2 Marlas in favour of petitioners/defendants. Consequently the decree shall be modified to exclude the said area of land in dispute, therefore, the decree in respect of remaining land shall remain intact. (ii) The entire amount of Rs.32,500 as price of land in dispute shall be paid to the petitioners/defendants. Attorneys of both the parties state that the deed of compromise has been signed or thumb marked by all the petitioners and Mst. Amina Bibi respondent. Learned counsel for the parties have also signed the compromise deed on our direction and vouch for its genuineness. None of the patties, according to them, is minor. We, therefore, accept the compromise and convert the petition for leave into an appeal and allow it in terms of the compromise/agreement marked 'C-I' with the result that the decree of the Trial Court stands modified so as to exclude therefrom 4 Kanals 7-1/2 Marlas of land comprised in Killa No.20, square No. 16 situate in Chak No. 11 Shumali, Tehsil Bhalwal, District Sargodha.. The decree with respect to the remaining suit land shall remain in tact. At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is directed that the amount of Rs.32,500 (Rupees thirty-two thousand five hundred only) deposited by the respondent/plaintiff in the Trial Court shall be paid to the petitioners. Matter having been disposed of on the basis of compromise between the parties, there shall be no order as to costs. A.A./H-3/S Order accordingly.