PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Citation Name: 2023 PLD 344 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SOHNEY KHAN vs GHULAM MUHAMMAD Ss — 2023 PLD 344 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2023 PLD 344 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
PLD
Parties
Citation Name: 2023 PLD 344 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SOHNEY KHAN vs GHULAM MUHAMMAD Ss
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

Citation Name: 2023 PLD 344 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SOHNEY KHAN VS GHULAM MUHAMMAD Ss. 42 & 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXIII, Rr.1(3) & 3---Suit for declaration and injunction---Compromise---Binding effect---Precondition---Earlier suit filed by respondents/plaintiffs was withdrawn unilaterally thereafter they filed instant suit for implementing a promise made by appellant/defendant in earlier proceedings---Trial Court rejected the plaint but Lower Appellate Court set aside the order and remanded the matter to Trial Court for decision afresh---Validity---Statement was given in absence of opponent party and even without any notice on application to withdraw earlier suit---Compromise could become effective only when the two or more parties agreed to settle a real or supposed claim in which each party had surrendered something in concession to each other---Unilateral statement given by respondents/plaintiffs and that too in absence of other side could not be taken as mutual concession or mutual promise, having any binding effect, especially when statement regarding so-called out of court compromise was not backed by any document---Such statement did not fulfill requirements of O. XXIII, R. 3, C.P.C., which necessitated satisfaction of the Court---If such an easy way of escaping restriction contained in O. XXIII, R. 1(3), C.P.C. by simply giving unilateral statement as to compromise was permitted, the very purpose of the provision of O. XXIII, C.P.C., would be negated---High Court set aside the order passed by Lower Appellate Court and restored that of Trial Court---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLD

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English