GHULAM SAJJAD vs THE STATE And Other

This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal directed against the order of the High Court, which declined to accept a compromise between the parties on the ground that the statements of the deceased's parents were made under undue influence and fear. The core legal question concerns the validity of a compromise effected under undue influence and whether interference by the Supreme Court is warranted in such circumstances. The Supreme Court held that the finding of the High Court regarding undue influence was not open to any exception, and thus refused to interfere with the impugned order, accordingly dismissing the petition with an observation that the petitioners may approach the High Court afresh to have the statements of the legal heirs recorded in court. The key principle laid down is that appellate courts will not interfere with concurrent or reasoned findings of lower courts regarding the invalidity of compromises vitiated by undue influence.