Sh. HANEEFURREHMAN vs MUHAMMAD JALALUDDIN
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan upon a compromise application filed by the learned counsel for the parties in an appeal arising from an ejectment proceeding. The core legal question concerns whether an appeal against an ejectment order can be disposed of in terms of an out-of-court amicable settlement wherein the respondent undertakes not to execute the ejectment order and consents to setting aside the impugned orders. The Supreme Court accepted the compromise between the parties, allowing the appeal and setting aside both the impugned judgment of the High Court and the impugned order of the Rent Controller directing the eviction of the appellant. The key principle laid down is that appellate proceedings involving ejectment orders can be resolved and disposed of by the consent of the parties based on a lawful out-of-court compromise.
- Can an appeal against an ejectment order be allowed by consent based on an out-of-court compromise between the parties?
- Whether the Supreme Court can set aside impugned judgments and eviction orders pursuant to a settlement reached between the parties outside the Court?
ORDER
1. ' ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--Learned counsel for the parties have filed a compromise application in the Court praying that in view of the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties outside the Court, respondent undertakes not to execute the ejectment order against the appellant in respect of the demised premises and he has also no objection if the appeal is allowed, by consent, and impugned orders of the Judgment passed against appellant are set aside.
2. In view of the compromise between the parties, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment of the High Court and the impugned order of the Rent A Controller directing eviction of the appellant are set aside. The parties are left to bear their own costs. With the disposal of the appeal Civil Miscellaneous Petition is also disposed of in the above terms.