Illegality and misrepresentation

2012 PLD 324 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

S. 9Contract Act (IX of 1872), Ss. 18, 19 & 21Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.152 & O.XXIII, R.3Recovery of bank loanCompromise decree, modification ofIllegality and misrepresentationVoidable agreementDetermination

Defendant's challenge was directed towards compromise agreement on the ground that it was tainted by illegalities amounting to misrepresentations and hence liable to be modified

Validity

Remedy sought, i.e. relief under S.152, C.P.C., was only available against decree

Compromise decree and agreement were not the same thing

Relief under S.152, C.P.C. was available in respect of a compromise decree without compromise agreement being impugned at all

Correction of compromise decree was not the same thing as modification of compromise agreement

Power to "correct" decree did not confer any power to modify agreement, as the two matters were separate and distinct and must be so dealt with

None of the provisions of Ss.18 and 19 of Contract Act, 1872, invoked by defendant were applicable

High Court declined to modify decree passed earlier on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties

Application was dismissed in circumstances.