1982 PLP (1) (SCMR)
ROSHAN AND OTHERS-Petitioners Versus ALI AHMAD-Respondent
| Citation | 1982 PLP (1) (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ROSHAN AND OTHERS-Petitioners Versus ALI AHMAD-Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1982 PLP (1) (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 1982 PLP (1) (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1982 PLP (1) (SCMR) (ROSHAN AND OTHERS-Petitioners Versus ALI AHMAD-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ghulam Sarwar Chaudri, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing : 29th April, 1981.
- Ghulam Sarwar Chaudri, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On petition against the order of the High Court of Lahore dated 15-1-1980 in R. S. A. No. 14 of 1980) -- O.XXIII, r. 3-Compromise of suit Parties entering into compro mise and admitting same before Court-Petition for leave to appeal converted into appeal and allowed in terms of compromise, leaving parties to bear their own costs-Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3). Respondent in person.
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑‑Roshan etc., petitioners, purchased some land in village Koth Gujjran, Tehsil and District Gujranwala. Ali Ahmed, respondent, filed a suit to pre‑empt the said sale claiming to have a superior right of pre‑emption as against the petitioners. The suit was decreed, whereupon the petitioners filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the Additional District Judge on 6‑12‑1979. The petitioners then filed an R. S. A. in the High Court which met the same fate vide the impugned judgment dated 15‑1‑1980. The petitioners thereupon filed the present C. P. S. L. A.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have entered into a compromise and prays that the appeal be allowed in terms of the compromise. Ali Ahmed, respondent, is also present in Court, and admits the compromise. The terms of the compromise are that Ali Ahmed, respondent, shall forego his right of pre‑emption in favour of the petitioners who shall retain the land in dispute in return the petitioners shall pay Ali Ahmed, respondent, a sum of Rs. 87000 Ali Ahmed shall also be at liberty to withdraw Rs. 30,000 deposited by him towards the Zare Panjum and the pre‑emption money.
3. In view of the above‑noted compromise which is admitted by both/ the parties, the petition is converted into an appeal and is allowed in terms of the compromise leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Leave refused.