1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Both the learned counsel for the parties in this appeal have stated that the contesting parties have settled the matter out of the Court. They have also produced a Deed of Compromise in the Court which is duly signed by the learned counsel for both the parties.
2. The compromise is also accompanied by a site plan wherein the subject-matter of the compromise has been shaded in red pencil. The compromise reads as follows - "1. That the parties abovenamed have arrived at the following compromise.
(i) That respondent No,3 (Muhammad Afzal son of Gulzar Muhammad) the tenant, will deliver vacant possession of the shop in dispute to the petitioner on or before 31-12-1988.
(ii) That in consideration of the compromise the petitioner (Mst. Rafia Khanum) will deliver the possession of 2 newly-constructed shops at ground floor (measuring 7.4.1/2" x 1.9" each) alongwith newly-constructed gallery at the first floor to be constructed over and above the 2 shops hereinbefore mentioned on the Southern side of the newly-constructed passage (shown red in the sketch) to Respondent No,3. It is agreed that after obtaining possession, the petitioner/landlady will reconstruct new shops and passage, according to the sanctioned plan, till 30-6-1989 and will deliver vacant possession: of the two abovementioned, newly-constructed shops alongwith gallery to the respondent No,3 on or before 30-6-1989."
3. After hearing both the learned counsel, we are satisfied that the compromise is for benefit of both the sides. It is neither unlawful nor unfair. This appeal accordingly is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid compromise. The abovementioned site plan shall be deemed as a part of the compromise and this judgment for all purposes including the certified copies. There shall be no order as to costs.