' Brief facts out of which the present application arises are that the applicant filed suit for recovery amounting to Rs,4,79,569 against the respondent. The suit of the applicant was dismissed as time- barred on 7-6-1992 by the Civil Judge 1st Class, Lahore. The applicant being aggrieved filed R.F.A.
No,79 of 1993 before this Court, which was admitted by the Registrar High Court for regular hearing vide order dated 29-11-1993. Subsequently the learned counsel for the appellant/applicant did not press the appeal under instruction and the appeal was disposed of accordingly vide order dated 2-1-2002. The present application is for the refund of court-fee amounting to Rs,15,000 affixed by the applicant/ appellant on the memorandum of appeal.
2. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that appeal was dismissed as not pressed, therefore, the applicant/appellant is entitled for refund of the fee affixed by him on the memorandum of appeal.
3. The learned Advocate-General, Mr. Maqbool Ellahi Malik was preset in the Court in connection with some other cases. He appeared on Court's call and sought adjournment for preparation, which request was not considered appropriate by us in view of the question of law having already been settled by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan.
4. We have considered the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties.
5. It is admitted fact that the appeal was dismissed as not pressed by the applicant/appellant, meaning thereby this Court had not to apply its mind and the controversy was finalized between the parties outside the Court.
6. In view of the aforesaid discussion application is allowed and he shall be issued the necessary certificate authorizing the applicant/appellant to recover the amount incurred by him on payment of court-fee on memorandum of appeal. In arriving at this conclusion we are fortified by the following judgments Sh. Riaz-ud-Din v. Aqil-ur-Rehman Siddiqui and 4 others PLD 1993 SC 76, Messrs Hussain Paper and Board Mills (Pvt.) Ltd. And 4 others v. Habib Credit and Exchange Bank Ltd. 2002 CLD 605, Pakistan Burmah Shell Ltd. v. Tariq Brothers 1997 CLC 761, Muhammad Afzal v.
Muhammad Aslam 1994 CLC 1277, Nabi Bux Khan Bhurgari v. National Bank of Pakistan PLD 1988 Kar.
24 and Muhammad Chatty Khan v. Muhammad Munir Khan and 2 others PLD 1992 Kar.
160.
7. In view of what has been discussed above, the application is allowed as prayed for and consequently the office is directed to issue requisite certificate to the applicant to enable the applicant to recover the amount incurred by him on memorandum of appeal, with no order as to costs.