Muhammad Yousaf vs Mst — 2024 YLR 2491 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

Muhammad Yousaf VS Mst. Bashiran Bibi (deceased) S. 12 (2)---Compromise, denial of---Provision under S.12(2) of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, invoking of---Scope---Applications under S.12(2) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (C.P.C.), filed in consolidated order passed in three Civil Revisions (CRs) which CRs were dismissed on the basis of a compromise arrived between the parties---Validity---Applicant had ignored second part of the impugned order which dealt with merits of the case---Perusal of the operative part of the impugned order not only rendered it clear that a consensus, during the proceedings in the Court, had been developed, inter se the parties, which was clearly reduced therein by the High Court that not only the parties, but the Revenue Officers concerned, were also directed to give effect to the compromise in the revenue record by sanctioning new mutations with regard to the property referred to in the operative paragraph in favour of the respondents; and in case of failure or refusal to adhere to or "comply with said commitment within stipulated period" by the applicant, all the CRswere deemed to have been dismissed leading to the logical conclusion that decree of the courts below, in favour of the decree-holders/respondents impugned in the CRs, had been upheld by the High Court---Natural corollary of the impugned order was that the applicant/petitioner was either required to comply with "the commitment" or the CRs stood dismissed---It was categorically held by the High Court (while passing impugned order) that failure to comply with the commitment within stipulated time would ipso facto result in dismissal of the CRs---Had this not been the situation, the High Court would have simply disposed of the CRs in light of the consensus and would not have dismissed the CRs on merit---Therefore, if the applicant was aggrieved of the impugned order in any manner, he should have assailed the dismissal order---Applications under S.12(2), C.P.C., filed in consolidated order of three Civil Revisionsby the revision petitioner, were dismissed, in circumstances.

Muhammad Yousaf vs Mst — 2024 YLR 2491 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR