MIAN SA.QIB NISAR, J.--- The petitioner is a tenant under the respondents, against whom, an ejectment petition was filed and the order of his eviction was passed on 30-3-1995. Aggrieved of the above, the petitioner filed an appeal and during the pendency of the appeal, a compromise was effected between the parties, according to which, the respondents, on the payment of Rs,65,000 to the petitioner, were entitled to seek the possession from the petitioner. Anyhow, subsequently the petitioner moved an application under section 12(2), C.P.C. Stating that, the amount of Rs,65,000 has not been paid to him, resultantly, the order of his eviction , which is based upon compromise, is the result of fraud and misrepresentation. This application has been dismissed in limine by the learned Court below, holding that no fraud has been practised upon the petitioner, while arriving to a compromise between the parties through their statements.
2. I concur with the learned Court below that this is not the case falling within the purview of section 12(2), C.P.C. No interference in the revisional jurisdiction is called for. This petition thus, has no force and is hereby dismissed.