1989 SCMR 1983 (PLP)
Mst. RAFIA KHANUM‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL D1STRICT JUDGE, OKARA and others Respondents
| Citation | 1989 SCMR 1983 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | Mst. RAFIA KHANUM‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL D1STRICT JUDGE, OKARA and others Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (v of 1908)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 SCMR 1983 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (v of 1908)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 SCMR 1983 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 SCMR 1983 (PLP) (Mst. RAFIA KHANUM‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL D1STRICT JUDGE, OKARA and others Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Ahmad Hasan Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Oureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Najmul Hasan Kazmi, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No.3.
- Date of hearing: 3rd September, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 12th April,1988 m Writ Petition No.1006 of 1988). ‑‑‑OXXIII, R.3‑‑Constitution of Pak1stan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑Compromise‑ Parties to appeal compromising out of Court‑‑Deed of compromise duly signed by parties and their counsel‑‑Compromise decd accompanied by a site plan wherein subject‑matter of compromise had been shaded in red‑‑Disposal of appeal‑‑Supreme Court felt satisfied that the compromise was for the benefit of both the sides being neither unlawful nor unfair‑‑Appeal was thus disposed of in terms of compromise‑‑Site plan accompanying the compromise deed would form part of the compromise and judgment for all purposes including certified copies.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Both the learned counsel for the parties in this appeal have stated that the contesting parties have settled the matter out of the Court. They have also produced a Deed of Compromise in the Court which is duly signed by the learned counsel for both the parties. The compromise is also accompanied by a site plan wherein the subject‑matter of the compromise has been shaded in red pencil. The compromise reads as follows "
1. That the parties abovenamed have arrived at the following compromise. (i) That respondent No.3 (Muhammad Afzal son of Gulzar Muhammad) the tenant, will deliver vacant possession of the shop in dispute to the petitioner on or before 31‑12‑1988. (ii) That in consideration of the compromise the petitioner (Mst. Rafia Khanum) will deliver the possession of 2 newly‑constructed shops at ground floor (measuring 7.4.1/2" x 1.9" each) along with newly constructed gallery at the first floor to be constructed over and above the 2 shops hereinbefore mentioned on the Southern side of the newly‑ constructed passage (shown red in the sketch) to Respondent No.3. It is agreed that after obtaining possession, the petitioner/landlady will reconstruct new shops and passage, according to the sanctioned plan, till 30‑6‑1989 and will deliver vacant possession: of the two abovementioned, newly‑constructed shops along with gallery to the respondent No.3 on or before 30‑6‑1989." After hearing both the learned counsel, we are satisfied that the compromise is for benefit of both the sides. It is neither unlawful nor unfair. This appeal accordingly is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid compromise. The abovementioned site plan shall be deemed as a part of the compromise and this judgment for all purposes including the certified copies. There shall be no order as to costs. A.A./R‑104/S Order accordingly.