HAQUE NAWAZ vs SULTAN and others

The petitioner, a vendee in a pre-emption matter, sought leave to appeal against the dismissal of his writ petition by the High Court. The original suit had been decreed against the petitioner on the basis of a statement made by his counsel, constituting a consent decree. In the petition for leave to appeal, the petitioner challenged the decree on the ground that his counsel had misconducted and made a false statement when conveying the consent. The core legal question was whether a writ petition is an appropriate remedy to challenge a consent decree based on the alleged misconduct of a counsel. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that while the petitioner might have a remedy against the counsel, the High Court acted rightly in declining to interfere in its writ jurisdiction regarding the consent decree. The key principle laid down is that a consent decree resulting from a statement of counsel cannot be effectively challenged through writ jurisdiction on the grounds of counsel misconduct, and the aggrieved party must pursue other appropriate remedies.