Pakistan Case Law
2014 SCMR 669

KHADIM HUSSAIN vs PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2014 SCMR 669
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Appeal No,891 of 2007
Date2014-01-23
Judge(s)Sarmad Jalal Osmany and Muhammad Ather Saeed
Authored bySarmad Jalal Osmany
ResultOrder accordingly
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

The appellant challenged a High Court judgment dated 15-4-2002, which dismissed a civil revision on merits despite an earlier compromise between the parties recorded on 9-4-2001. The respondents argued that a subsequent application under Section 12(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 had been filed, leading to the suspension of the compromise order. The Supreme Court observed that the record did not contain any final adjudication on the respondents' application filed under Section 12(2), Code of Civil Procedure 1908. The Court held that without the initial compromise decree being formally set aside through the proper legal process under Section 12(2), the High Court could not have proceeded to decide the civil revision on its merits. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and remanded the matter, directing that the application under Section 12(2) remain pending before the High Court for an early decision. The key principle established is that a court cannot ignore a valid compromise decree and decide a matter on merits without first formally setting aside that decree through the statutory procedure provided by law.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can a court decide a civil revision on merits while a valid compromise decree between the parties remains in effect?
  • Is it procedurally correct for a court to ignore an existing compromise order without first deciding an application filed under Section 12(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908?
  • What is the effect of a pending application under Section 12(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 on the finality of a compromise decree?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 12(2), Code of Civil Procedure 1908
civil revisioncompromise decreeSection 12(2) CPCadjudication on meritsprocedural irregularityremand

ORDER

' SARMAD JALAL OSMANY, J.---Malik Saeed Hassan, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court, appearing for the appellant says that the civil revision filed by the appellant before the learned High Court was compromised between the parties as per order dated 9-4-2001, but admittedly thereafter the impugned judgment was also passed dated 15-4-2002, dismissing the civil revision on merits in which event the same cannot be sustained.

2. To this submission Mr. Tariq Masood, learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing for respondents says that after the matter had been compromised on 9-4-2001 an application under section 12(2), C.P.C. Had been moved by the respondents and per order dated 11-12-2001, the compromise order of 9-4-2001 was suspended.

3. We have heard both the learned ASCs for the parties and have also perused the record with their assistance.

4. It is quite apparent that there is no order deciding the application under section 12(2), C.P.C. Filed by the respondents in which event without the compromise judgment and decree being set aside under section 12(2), C.P.C., no order could be passed on merits. Consequently, we allow this appeal.

The impugned judgment dated 15-4-2002 is set aside. The application filed by the respondents under section 12(2), C.P.C., challenging the consent decree/compromise etc. Shall remain pending with the learned High Court and shall be decided at the earliest.

4. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

Cited by 3 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.