SCMR 1989

1989 PLP 1192 (SCMR)

Mst. NASIM AKHTAR‑‑Appellant. Versus KHALIL and 10 others‑‑Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
‑‑‑Art.185‑‑Appeal to Supreme Court‑‑Inheritance‑‑Parties compromised out of Court and appellant agreed to pay certain amount to the heirs of deceased by depositing same in the Supreme Court‑‑Appeal was disposed of in terms of settlement out of the Court with directions that amount be paid to persons concerned in terms of the settlement and any dispute with regard to the payment shall first be dealt with by both the counsel in mutual consultation, for its resolution.‑‑Compromise.
Decided Date
Civil Appeal No.36 of 1989, decided on 7th March, 1989.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Javid Iqbal and Usman Ali Shah, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1989 PLP 1192 (SCMR)
Forum / Court ‑‑‑Art.185‑‑Appeal to Supreme Court‑‑Inheritance‑‑Parties compromised out of Court and appellant agreed to pay certain amount to the heirs of deceased by depositing same in the Supreme Court‑‑Appeal was disposed of in terms of settlement out of the Court with directions that amount be paid to persons concerned in terms of the settlement and any dispute with regard to the payment shall first be dealt with by both the counsel in mutual consultation, for its resolution.‑‑Compromise.
Bench Members Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Javid Iqbal and Usman Ali Shah, JJ
Parties Mst. NASIM AKHTAR‑‑Appellant. Versus KHALIL and 10 others‑‑Respondents
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1192 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 1192 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the ‑‑‑Art.185‑‑Appeal to Supreme Court‑‑Inheritance‑‑Parties compromised out of Court and appellant agreed to pay certain amount to the heirs of deceased by depositing same in the Supreme Court‑‑Appeal was disposed of in terms of settlement out of the Court with directions that amount be paid to persons concerned in terms of the settlement and any dispute with regard to the payment shall first be dealt with by both the counsel in mutual consultation, for its resolution.‑‑Compromise. bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Javid Iqbal and Usman Ali Shah, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1192 (SCMR) (Mst. NASIM AKHTAR‑‑Appellant. Versus KHALIL and 10 others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑

Representation

  • Ch. Mazhar‑ul‑Haq, Advocate instructed by S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate -on‑Record for Appellant.
  • Hanif Niazi, Advocate instructed by Rana M.A. Qadri, Advocate‑on -Record for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing: 7th March, 1989.
  • Mazharul Haq, Advocate,
  • Advocate of respondents

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the order, dated 21st June, 1988 of the Lahore High Court in Civil Revision No.1081 of 1988). ‑‑‑Art.185‑‑Appeal to Supreme Court‑‑Inheritance‑‑Parties compromised out of Court and appellant agreed to pay certain amount to the heirs of deceased by depositing same in the Supreme Court‑‑Appeal was disposed of in terms of settlement out of the Court with directions that amount be paid to persons concerned in terms of the settlement and any dispute with regard to the payment shall first be dealt with by both the counsel in mutual consultation, for its resolution.‑‑[Compromise].

Judgment & Decree

MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑This appeal through leave of the Court came up for hearing this morning. Learned counsel for the respondents stated that in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 1st March, 1989 the possession of entire property in dispute having been handed over to the appellant's side, the keys have also been accordingly delivered. Learned counsel for the appellant accepted this statement as correct. Both the learned counsel, to be fair to the parties, made a request that this is one of those cases in which the Court should allow further time to the parties to settle the dispute out of the Court "as it has already led to multifarious litigation causing harm to both sides". Time having, accordingly, been allowed, learned counsel re‑appeared after some time and stated that the subject‑matter of the dispute having been settled on the term that the appellant side shall pay Rs.70,000 to the respondent side in token of final settlement of all disputes relating to the property in question. There remained some dispute as to how this amount is to be paid and to whom. Learned counsel for the appellant stated that the amount shall not be paid to any person other than "all the legal heirs of Malik Chanan Din on the respondents' side". After some consultation amongst themselves, learned counsel for the respondents agreed to the suggestion that if the amount is deposited in this Court, it will be received only by the legal heirs of Malik Chanan Dm from the respondents' side. Both the learned counsel were then asked by the Court to put this aspect of the settlement in writing. They have done so by producing a written memorandum signed/endorsed by both of them, as follows:‑‑ "The parties have compromised. The respondents claim 1/12th share in the premises in dispute as an inheritance of Malik Chanan Din deceased. The petitioner has agreed to pay Rs.70,000 to the legal heirs of the said Malik Chanan Din deceased. The petitioner is prepared to deposit the agreed amount in Court. Petitioner Through: Sd/‑xxxxxx Mazharul Haq, Advocate, 7‑3‑

89. The respondents are ready to accept the amount of Rs.70,000 as the price of their legal share of 1/12th in dispute and will receive the same from the Court in lieu of receipt. Sd/‑xxxxx Advocate of respondents 7‑3‑89." The efforts made by both the learned counsel are appreciated. This appeal is disposed of in terms of the afore reproduced settlement out of the Court. The respondents' side and all persons claiming through them have given up any further claim to the property in dispute on the appellant depositing Rs.70,000 in this Court as agreed. Order accordingly. It shall be paid to persons concerned in terms of the afore reproduced memorandum. Any dispute with regard to payment shall first be dealt with by both the learned counsel in mutual consultation, for its resolution. This appeal accordingly stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. It is thus expected that all litigation shall now end and the parties shall make statements whenever necessary to achieve this purpose. M.BA./N‑148/S Order accordingly.