1986 PLP 876 (MLD)
ATTA HUSSAIN SHEIKH‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1986 PLP 876 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Fazl‑i‑Mahmood, J |
| Parties | ATTA HUSSAIN SHEIKH‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE and others‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 876 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 876 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Fazl‑i‑Mahmood, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 876 (MLD) (ATTA HUSSAIN SHEIKH‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Munir A . Sheikh for Petitioner.
- Khawaja Saeed‑uz‑Zafar for Respondent No.2.
- Date of hearing: 13th December, 1983.
Headnotes / Summary
Provisional Constitution Order (1 of 1981)‑‑ ‑‑‑Art. 9‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction‑‑Conciliatory talk taking place between parties in writ, proceedings‑‑Compromise arrived at in. public interest because it shortens litigation‑‑Compromise allowed in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
This writ petition, which was in limine, is admitted to a regular hearing as the learned counsel for respondent No. 3 has accepted notice and is being disposed of today by the consent of the parties.
2. There has been a conciliatory talk in this case in keeping wit the spirit of the statute out of which these proceedings arise. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.‑3 stated that he has full instructions to settle the matter, if possible, to secure his clients best interests.
3. As a result of conciliatory talk between the two learned counsel in which the petitioner also participated, it has been agreed to: That the petitioner shall pay in Court readily a sum of Rs.35,00 by way of cross cheque in the name of respondent No. 3 in ful settlement of all the claims of the respondent arising out of th matrimony. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 states that respondent shall not claim any further sums including the dowry etc. from the petitioner as the entire matrimonial dispute no comes to an end. He has accordingly accepted in Court the cross. cheque in question.
4. I have considered the compromise. It appears to be lawful an is otherwise in public interest because it shortens litigation.' I would allow this compromise and dispose of the writ petition accordingly. There shall, however, be no order as to costs in view of the course adopted by the parties. M.Y.H. Order accordingly.