(Querist) 12 March 2009
This query is : Resolved
In our muslim family partition suit which is decree back in 1970, with 11 decree holders,
And the suit is pending in Final decree proceedings now and is adjourned for next month,
After the preliminary decree, some of the defendants have sold the decree schedule properties with out the knowledge of plaintiffs, some of the non bonafide purchasers are somehow made as parties in the pending final decree proceedings, now some of the plaintiffs LR’s and defendants have done some out of court compromise of one of the decree schedule properties and has come to court with a joint memo to remove that particular survey number from decree as compromise has been done, for which one of LR of one of the plaintiff has objected in the court thru objections memo, that she is not interested in going for such a compromise which is not fair, But the court is forcing us to go for compromise by saying u alone objecting for compromise remaining all LR’s of defendants and plaintiff have agreed,
Does law permits the judge to remove one of the suvey number of decree schedule properties from decree, as the compromise has been done even though there is an objection from one of the decree holder plaintiff Legal heir.
Or court cannot give go ahead for compromise until a there is a objection from even a single LR of decree holder.
(Expert) 13 March 2009
Well it depends on the question whether the person now objecting has any interest in the properties covered by the compromise. If his interest is not affected, then there can be a valid compromise even if he does not give consent. But if his interest is going to be affected then the compromise can not be given effect to.