The present appeal has arisen out of an objection petition, filed by the appellant under Order XXI, Rule 90, C.P.C., which has been dismissed by the learned Judge, Banking Court-II, Lahore vide order dated 16-11-2005.
2. The case of the appellant is that he has purchased the property from one Mst Noor Begum, who had allegedly exchanged the said property with Muhammad Irshad, the original judgment-debtor of the suit brought by Messrs Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited against him, which was decreed. The property, in question, which is about 88-Kanals for the satisfaction of that decree, was put to auction and had been purchased by respondent No.4 for an amount of Rs.15,90,000 and this sale has been confirmed by the executing Court.
Earlier, Mst. Noor Begum challenged the said sale by filing an application under Order XXI Rule 89, C.P.C., but the same was dismissed. However, the appeal against this order was allowed by this Court and the matter has been remanded to the executing Court, where it is still stated to be pending.
3. The present impugned order, as mentioned above, is on account of dismissal of the appellant's application under Order XXI, Rule 90, C.P.C. And his claim is that he entered into a purchase agreement of 156-Kanals of land with Mst. Noor Begum including 88-Kanals (land in dispute) regarding which a dispute between him and Mst. Noor Begum is pending before the Civil Court, thus, in the objections, the appellant assailed the auction in favour of respondent No.4 on the ground of certain irregularities, fraud etc., the application was turned down through the impugned order.
4. Today, the parties before us, such as, the appellant, the auction purchaser, Mst. Noor Begum have settled their dispute, in the following term:--
(i) That the auction purchaser shall be compensated to the tune of Rs.5,00,000 over and above the auction price of Rs.15,90,000. This amount shall be paid to him in the manner that he shall be entitled to withdraw Rs.7,55,000 from the Banking Court, which after the satisfaction of the decree is lying deposited with the Court, out of the auction price, whereas, the remaining amount of Rs.12,55,000 shall be paid by the appellant to him within a period of two months, in view of the above, the Court sale in favour of the auction purchaser shall stand cancelled.
5. In the suit for specific performance titled "Shafat Ahmed v. Mst. Noor Begum", pending in the Civil Court, the names of the auction purchaser and the Bank, who had subsequently joined as a party shall stand deleted and the suit shall be decided in accordance with law.
6. As the Court sale in favour of the auction purchaser has been cancelled/annulled, the appellant and Mst. Noor Begum shall have no objection if he apply to the D.O.R. For the refund of the stamp duty paid by him, which matter obviously shall be considered by the D.O. R in accordance with law.
In the light of above terms and conditions, this appeal is accordingly disposed of with the specific direction that the Court sale in favour of the Court auctioner is cancelled.