1992 PLP 1471 (SCMR)

MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CJ.

This direct appeal has arisen out of a very unfortunate dispute between a father/respondent No.l and his sons and daughters, the appellants herein. The respondent filed a suit to have it declared that the alleged gift made on 9-1-1980 and registered on 12-1-1980 in favour of the appellants was the result of fraud and forgery and was, therefore, not binding upon the plaintiff. This suit was dismissed by the trial Court but in an elaborate well- considered judgment impugned through this appeal a Division Bench of the High Court reversed the decision of the trial Court. Hence this appeal by the alleged donees, the children of the alleged donor. When the appeal came up for hearing on 16-3-1991, it gave us not only surprise but also anguish and shock to hear what the learned counsel for the respondent/father had to state about the alleged abduction/ill-treatment meted out to him by his own children. It gave us further shock to notice that the children included the daughters also, one of them yet unmarried. We would have certainly noted the details of the statement made by the respondent's counsel at the Bar in regard to the afore-noticed episode/s but now refrain from doing so; as, the contesting parties have after willingly accepting our direction for a meaningful dialogue for an out of Court settlement, have amicably compromised the matter. It has been, to a considerable extent, made possible by an outstanding performance by their learned counsel and their most willing assistance and cooperation without charging any additional remuneration for the additional laborious work in and out of Court. We while appreciating this respondent to the call of duty by the learned counsel appearing in this case at this stage in this Court, also express our regrets on the attitude of the parties and agents for what in the past had happened but should not have happened; vis-a-vis, the duties and regard in such relationship is enjoined by Islam. Under the said dispensation while the appellants were under strict command not to utter even harsh words against their father, and here the allegation is that he was forcibly abducted by them or at their instance; and on the other hand the father is required to be just and fair as also compassionate to children particularly for his daughters. Regarding them an accepted Sunnah Injunction clearly promised high reward for those parents who properly look after and bring up daughters. The learned counsel of both sides have assured us that the children, i.e. the appellants' side, have put themselves at the mercy of their father lie has also on account of parental affection re-bestowed his favours upon them. This finds sufficiently projected in the written compromise which is recorded hereunder:-- Raja Muhammad Anwar Muhammad Munir Peracha Senior Advocate for Respondents for Appellant "25-3-1992 The compromise is self-explanatory. It is hoped and expected that no dispute would arise between the parties in future. However, if it is not implemented in word and spirit with which it has been brought about, entered into and executed; the affected party can amongst other remedies, also approach this Court. Learned counsel for the parties have assured the Court that the compromise is genuine and have strongly urged in presence of their respective clients that it should be accepted and made the order of the Court. The request is allowed. This appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise. The impugned decree passed by the High Court shall accordingly, be modified. There shall he no order as to costs. M.B.A./K-191/S Order accordingly.