1998 PLP 2735 (SCMR)
DARAZ KHAN and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUZAFFAR KHAN‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1998 PLP 2735 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Irshad Hasan Khan and Sh. Ijaz Nisar, JJ |
| Parties | DARAZ KHAN and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUZAFFAR KHAN‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 2735 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 2735 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Irshad Hasan Khan and Sh. Ijaz Nisar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 2735 (SCMR) (DARAZ KHAN and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUZAFFAR KHAN‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court with Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 1st April, 1998.
- Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court with Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 28‑3‑1997 passed by Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench in Regular Second Appeal No.355 of 1975). ‑‑‑‑O. XXIII, R. 3‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3)‑‑‑Petitioners claimed that during course of hearing of appeal before High Court parties had settled their dispute outside the Court but the High Court while deciding appeal did not take into consideration settlement between the parties‑‑‑Respondent denied alleged settlement and filed affidavit that no such compromise was effected‑‑‑High Court was, thus, right in not disposing of suit on basis of alleged compromise between the parties‑‑‑Provisions of O.XXIII, R. 3, C.P.C., had not been violated in any manner by the High Court while dismissing application for decreeing suit, in terms of disputed compromise‑‑‑Petitioners, however, had not disputed findings on merits of High Court‑‑‑Leave to appeal to Supreme Court was refused in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.
Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment dated 28-3-1997 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi in Regular Second Appeal No.355 of 1975.
2. The sole grievance of the petitioners is that during the course of hearing of appeal the parties had arrived at a settlement outside the Court on the following terms:-- The respondent rejected the alleged settlement and sworn a affidavit that no such compromise was effected. Thus visualized, the learned Judge in Chambers was right in not disposing of the suit on the basis of alleged compromise between the parties. We do not find that the provisions of Order XXIII, Rule 3, C.P.C. has been violated in any manner by the learned Judge in Chambers while dismissing the petition for decreeing the suit in terms of impugned compromise.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has not disputed the findings on the merits of the Second Appeal dismissed by the High Court. Resultantly, the petition is dismissed and leave refused. A.A./D-5/S Leave refused.