1. S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J: --Leave to appeal has been sought by Mst. Eido petitioner against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 28-9-1985, whereby her Regular First Appeal, arising out of suit for specific performance, was dismissed.
2. The plaintiff/petitioner filed a suit for specific performance of a compromise entered between the parties that the respondent No.1 should pay Rs.15,000 in lieu of the land which he had promised to transfer in favour of the petitioner. The suit after contest by the respondent was dismissed on 22-4- 1984. The petitioner filed appeal before the District Judge Gujrat which came up for hearing before the Addl. District Judge, who vide his order dated 10-6-1985 returned the memo. Of appeal to the petitioner, for want of pecuniary jurisdiction. The petitioner then filed a Regular First Appeal before the Lahore High Court, Lahore on 12-6-1985, alongwith an application under section 14 of the Limitation Act. A learned Division Bench of the High Court vide its order dated 28-9-85 dismissed the same in limine.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the findings of the Courts below. The question involved in this petition is, whether the period spent in pursuing the appeal in the Court of Addl. District Judge would give the benefit of section 14 of the Limitation Act to the petitioner, as alleged that the appeal was filed on the bona fide mistake and on the wrong advice of the counsel of the petitioner. This question needs consideration of this Court, therefore, vie grant leave to appeal.
4. Security is Rs.5,000.
5. Appeal should be ready on the present record with direction to parties to file additional necessary documents, if any.