ABDUL SALIQ KHAN Vs. NAHID KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has impugned the judgment and decree dated 30.10.2010 wherein a direction had been given to the trial judge to draw up the formal decree in terms of its judgment dated 03.07.2006; further holding that the order dated 03.07.2006 was an executable order as the statements of the parties were binding upon them. The executing court on 15.02.2010 had dismissed the execution petition holding that the order dated 03.07.2006 (passed in suit No. 1333/1995) was a suit which had been dismissed as withdrawn/compromised; such an order was not a "decree" and as such not executable. The impugned judgment on 30.10.2010 had allowed the appeal against the afore-noted order.

(2.) This is a second appeal. Before this Court, it has been urged that a substantial question of law has arisen as the impugned judgment has committed a perversity in giving a direction to the trial court to draw up a decree; executing court had rightly dismissed the execution petition upholding the objections of the Appellant as the executing court could not have gone behind the decree, there was no decree in the eyes of law; it was only an order; it was rightly held that such an order was not an executable order.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Appellant has relied upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court reported in Mohd. Amin v. Mohd. Iqbal,158 2009 DLT 531 to support his submission. It is stated that this judgment can be applied on all four squares to the case in hand. It is pointed out that in this case also; the parties had entered into a settlement whereby in terms of their compromise agreement, the suit stood dismissed as withdrawn; Division Bench of this Court has held that such a compromise arrived at between the parties did not amount to a decree and was not executable. The afore-noted ratio would apply to the facts of the instant case.