This judgment will dispose of Writ Petitions Nos. 11978/92; 12220/92, 9045/93, 14492/93 and Civil Revision Nos. 450/93, since the question involved is the same.
2. Briefly in all these cases the petitioners filed applications under section 12 (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as C.P.C.) for recall of the decree obtained on the basis of arbitration awards. The applications were summarily rejected initially by the Trial Court and then by the revisional Court on the sole ground that section 12 (2), C.P.C was not applicable to the decree obtained on the strength of the arbitration award. Judgment of the Supreme Court reported as Government of Sindh and another v. Ch. Fazal Muhammad and another (PLD 1991 SC 197) was followed.
3. Learned counsel appearing in support of these petitions have submitted that the question involved, viz, applicability of section 12 (2), C. P. C to the arbitration decrees has since been settled by the Supreme Court and they have cited Muhammad Yasin v. Sh. Hanif Ahmad and others (1993 SCM R 437). The submission is correct. In the later judgment the Court has held that section 12(2), C.P.C is equally applicable to arbitration decrees. The Supreme Court has noticed the earlier judgment and has distinguished the same.
4. In view of the declaration of law by the Supreme Court and respectfully following the same, I allow all these petitions and declare the impugned order of the Trial Court as well as of the District Court passed in revisions/appeals as without lawful authority and of no legal effect. Resultantly, the applications under section 12 (2), C.P.C shall be deemed to be pending in the Trial Court which shall now be disposed of in. Accordance with law and expeditiously. In all these cases the parties are left to bear their own costs.