1991 PLP 342 (SCMR)
ALI AKSAR and others — Petitioners Versus BAGH ALI and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 342 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, C.J. and Rustam S. Sidhwa, J |
| Parties | ALI AKSAR and others — Petitioners Versus BAGH ALI and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 342 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 342 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, C.J. and Rustam S. Sidhwa, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 342 (SCMR) (ALI AKSAR and others — Petitioners Versus BAGH ALI and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Inamul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court with Manzoor Ilahi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- M. Munir Piracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No.1.
- Nemo for Respondents Nos. 2 to 10.
- Date of hearing: 28th February, 1990.
- Mian Inamul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court with Manzoor Ilahi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- M. Munir Piracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No.1.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the Lahore High Court Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi dated 27-2-1989 in RSA No. 682 of 1968).
Art.185(3)
Not possible for Supreme Court to review judgment passed by High Court which was based on agreement of parties and which was recorded by Court in presence of parties with necessary explanation to make matter more explicit
If petitioners had any grievance, they could move that Court for necessary clarification.
Judgment & Decree
RUSTAM S. SIDHWA, J.‑‑‑Through the present petition Ali Aksar and others, petitioners basically seek clarification of the order of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dated 27‑2‑.1989 passed in R.S.A. No.682 of 1968.
2. It appears that the parties having compromised the matter, the learned Single Judge recorded the same in his short judgment on 27‑2‑1989, also adding a clarification in the penultimate sentence for the purposes of being more explicit. It is now submitted that the said sentence has the effect of changing the very basis of the agreement between the parties and that the same should not have been recorded. It is not possible for this Court to review the judgment passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court, which was based on the agreement of the parties and which he recorded in their presence, with the necessary explanation to make the matter more explicit. 1f the petitioners have any grievance, they can move the learned Single Judge, for necessary clarification. There being no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed. However, nothing herein contained shah bar either party seeking clarification of the impugned judgment from the learned Judge who passed the impugned judgment. H.B.T./A‑732/S Petition dismissed.