SULEMAN KHAN Versus SABRAN BIBI , Nemo

1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J .--The contesting parties in this appeal, through leave of the Court, have applied for its disposal in accordance with the compromise which has been submitted in writing. Both the learned counsel state that from the respondents' side, only Mst.Sabran Bibi respondent No.1 is contesting-party and that Muhammad Din respondent No.2 is only pro forma respondent. He has no live interest in this appeal. They have also assured the Court that they are satisfied about the genuineness of the compromise. The application for acceptance of the compromise is signed by both of them.

2. We have questioned the persons concerned present in Court and feel that there is no impediment, legal or otherwise, in accepting the compromise. 1t reads as follows:---

3. The amount of Rs.1,00,000 (one lac) mentioned in the compromise has been paid in Court to Mst.Sabran Bibi respondent No.1. It needs to be mentioned as a correction that in the compromise the particulars of this appeal are wrongly mentioned to the extent that instead of writing the words "Civil Appeal" No.590, the words "CPSLA" No.590 have been written. The scribe wrongly understood that the proceedings before this Court were still at the leave stage. On the other hand leave having been granted on 8-11-1988, it is now Civil Appeal No.590 of 1988, which is being disposed of.

4. Accordingly, while accepting the compromise as stated above, we allow the appeal in terms thereof. There shall be no order as to costs.

5. AA./S-498/S ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.