Mst Anwar Begum (Deceased) Through L.Rs. And Other vs Muhammad
This petition is directed against an order dated 11.10.2000 passed by the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, which dismissed a miscellaneous application filed under section 12(12) of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 and declined to set aside a compromise decree dated 4.10.1999. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether a compromise decree can be set aside under section 12(12) of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 on the ground that the compromise is not being acted upon by the opposite party, in the absence of any allegations of fraud, misrepresentation, or want of jurisdiction. The Supreme Court held that the non-implementation of a compromise is not a valid ground to set aside a decree under section 12(12) of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. The key principle laid down is that relief under section 12(12) requires established grounds of fraud, misrepresentation, or lack of jurisdiction, and mere subsequent non-compliance with the terms of a compromise does not warrant the setting aside of a judicial decree.
- Can a compromise decree be set aside under section 12(12) of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 on the ground that the compromise is not being acted upon?
- Is subsequent non-compliance with the terms of a compromise a valid ground to set aside a decree under section 12(12) of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908?
- Section 12(12), Code of Civil Procedure 1908
ORDER KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMADY, J.- This petition calls in question an order dated 11.10.2000 passed by a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench in a miscellaneous application filed therein bearing No. 1636-C of 1999 under section 12(12) of the CPC. The learned High Court dismissed the said application and had declined to set aside the decree dated 4.10.1999 on the ground that no allegation of fraud or misrepresentation or even want or lack of jurisdiction had been made out to impugn the said decree. Even before us the complaint of the petitioner or not that the side through any fraud or misrepresentation or even that the decree in question had been passed without jurisdiction but the grievance is that the said compromise on the basis of which the decree in question had been passed, was not being acted upon by the other side.
2. This is hardly a ground on which a decree could be set aside under section 12(12) of the CPC.
3. In this view of the matter, this petition is misconceived which is accordingly dismissed and . revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.