SHAHEEN AKBAR and 5 others vs PAKISTAN AIR FORCE WELFARE TRUST and 3
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan upon a petition for leave to appeal filed by Shaheen Akbar and others against an order of the High Court refusing to restrain respondents from interfering with the alleged possession of acquired lands. During the course of arguments, the parties reached a mutually agreed compromise. The core legal question concerned whether the petitioners could be protected in their possession pending the final decision of the intra-court appeal pending before the High Court. The Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal and disposed of it in terms of the written compromise signed by the learned counsel for both parties, whereby the petitioners agreed not to be disturbed from their possession of specific land areas comprising a dairy farm and a house until the final decision of the pending intra-court appeal. The court laid down the principle that matters can be amicably resolved and disposed of in terms of lawful compromises arrived at between contesting parties during judicial proceedings.
- Can a petition for leave to appeal be disposed of in terms of a compromise arrived at by the parties during arguments?
- Whether parties can mutually agree to protect possession of disputed land pending the final decision of an intra-court appeal?
ORDER
' RUSTAM S. SIDHWA, J.---This is a petition by Shaheen Akbar and others, petitioners, seeking leave to appeal against the order of a learned Single Judge dismissing C.M. No,960 of 1991 (filed in I.CA.
No,7 of 1991) and refusing to restrain the respondents from interfering with the possession of the acquired lands still alleged to be with the petitioners.
2. During arguments the parties arrived at a compromise, -which they have filed. The said compromise bears the signatures of both the learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent No,1. The same reads as follows:- ' That the parties have mutually agreed that without prejudice to their respective rights in the High Court in I.C.A. 7 of 1991 (now pending) the petitioners will not be disturbed from their possession of Dairy Farm and a house existing in Khasra No,69. (4 Kanals and 7 Marlas), Khasra No,70 (5 Kanals and 1 Marla) and Khasra No,71 (a house in 1 Kanal and 2 Marlas) by the respondents till the final decision of the ' said ICA. This agreement covers an area of 10 Kanals and 10 Marlas.
3. In view of the above, this petition is converted into an appeal and the same is disposed of in terms of the agreement arrived at between the parties, as stated above. 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.