'FAROOQ ALI CHANNA , J.---The applicant Abdul Hafeez Arain has filed this civil revision application against the order dated 8-12-2012 passed by learned 1st. Additional District Judge, Shaheed Benazirabad (hereinafter referred to as Appellate Court) in Civil Appeal No,79 of 2012, whereby the Appellate Court disposed of the aforesaid civil appeal as withdrawn on the statement filed by the applicant himself.
2. Since the impugned order was passed on the request of the applicant, therefore, learned counsel for the applicant was asked to satisfy this court, as to how the civil revision application is maintainable against such order, the learned counsel inspite of replying the query properly referred to certain terms and conditions of the settlement which had taken place between the applicant and the private respondents, on the intervention of Nekmards of the locality. Learned counsel further contended that the private respondents did not honour the terms and conditions and assurance given to the applicant in faisla held before filing the statement for withdrawal of the appeal, therefore, the decision taken in faisla for withdrawal of appeal was not binding upon the applicant, he requested that the impugned order dated 8-12-2012 may be recalled and the Appellate Court may be directed to decide the appeal on merits.
3. The submissions made by the learned counsel for applicant are groundless for invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under section 115 C.P.C., which can only be exercised if the subordinate Court has exercised (a) a jurisdiction not vested in it by law or (b) failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it and (c) acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity. Learned counsel for the applicant has failed to point out any of above three conditions in the impugned order, hence this civil revision application is not maintainable.
4. Besides above, the Appellate Court has passed the impugned order on 8-12-2012 and the applicant has filed this civil revision application after the lapse of more than 90 days period provided in the statute for filing the revision application, as such, the same is also time-barred.
5. For the above reasons, this civil revision being not maintainable and also being time barred is dismissed with no order as to cost.