1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J: --Leave to appeal has been sought; against the acceptance by the High Court, of respondent's Civil Revision with the finding that it was no more possible for the resolution of the controversy between the parties to resort to arbitration and that the civil suit already filed shall continue.
2. Earlier by order dated 22-3-1989 the petitioners' prayer for stay of the proceedings in the suit was refused by this Court. Learned counsel stated that the suit has already made some progress. He has also informed us that the suit was filed after nearly 17 years of protracted litigation on the questions relating to arbitration. In other words learned counsel admitted that if the impugned judgment is set aside and the parties are compelled to resort first to arbitration and thereafter in all probability the case would go again to the Civil Court, it will take if not more nearly an additional period of a decade. He has not denied that the Civil Court, would in the circumstances of this case, after the exclusion of the arbitration would be within its competence to adjudicate upon all the questions and decide the controversial issues between the parties. That being so, notwithstanding any technical defect or error having been pointed out by the learned counsel, we do not consider it a fit case for grant of leave to appeal which is likely to result into immense hardship. The suit shall continue to its logical end. Leave to appeal thus is refused. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.