A Suit Withdrawn Based on a Settlement Cannot Be Refiled

Let me tell you about a case, and what legal rights you have, and how, in light of them, you can avoid prolonged litigation. There was a family, A had two sons and two daughters, A died, two sons, two daughters, and a widow survived. There was a piece of land, twenty kanals, that became commercial. Out of this piece, the deceased had sold ten kanals of property to one of his sons, through various registrations, two kanals here, ten marlas there, in this way he sold ten kanals of land to one son, and the remaining ten kanals were to be divided among the two sons, two daughters, and the widow. Now one daughter got up and filed a suit that these sale deeds made in one son's name be cancelled, that this is a fraudulent document, a fabricated document, that our father never sold this to him. Now the second daughter also knew that one brother had bought this from their father, the other brother also knew, the mother also knew. Now she filed a suit for cancellation of the document on a technical basis, that a power of attorney was made, this happened through that power of attorney, this matter occurred. That suit ran for about a year, and after a year the mother got a settlement made among all the siblings. After getting the settlement made, in her capacity as mother, she pressured that son, after pressuring him he said, you keep five kanals, and the remaining five kanals be divided equally, according to the inheritance shares, between you two brothers and you two sisters, and I relinquish my own share. I relinquish my own share, she emotionally pressured her son, and after emotionally pressuring him, a settlement agreement was written. Now that sister's husband was mischievous, so when this agreement was made, a clause was mischievously and forcibly inserted into it, that whenever this fifteen-kanal piece is sold, it will be sold together as a whole, this was an unlawful clause, unconstitutional, against fundamental rights, that if I own something, I have the right, whether I sell it or not, whether I keep it, whatever the situation, but all the parties accepted this agreement, and based on this agreement that suit was dismissed. Based on this agreement that suit was dismissed, and that agreement was produced in court and marked as Exhibit C-1, and when this suit was withdrawn, it was withdrawn unconditionally, no permission was taken to refile it, rather the court bound all the parties that they were all bound by this agreement, Exhibit C-1, and it must be complied with. Now, after that agreement, two sons and one daughter, that is, two brothers and one sister, wanted to sell their property, the other sister, or her husband, obstructed it, he wasn't willing to sell, a rate was set, they started selling, they started making an agreement, she said, sir, I'm not selling, the agreement got obstructed, going back and forth, two years passed in this whole process. After two years passed, one brother said, fine, then I'm going to court, if you don't back off from this, if you're going to blackmail us, I'm going to court and I'll get this enforced. When this was said, that sister filed the exact same, carbon-copy suit she had filed before, adding one paragraph, saying, sir, they're not fulfilling the agreement, they're not abiding by the agreement, they're not meeting the conditions under this agreement, and filed the suit. Now they came to me in a distressed state, saying, sir, a suit has been filed again, now this will take another two, four years, what is this matter, we don't understand anything. I read the suit, I told them, be reassured, neither will the stay order hold, nor will this suit survive. Because Order 23, Rule 3, Sub-rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code is very clear on this: you filed a suit, after filing it a compromise happened between you. A compromise deed, settlement agreement, or agreement was written. Once that agreement was exhibited, and that suit was withdrawn unconditionally, that all parties are bound by the terms of this agreement, then a suit cannot be filed again on that same old cause of action. The law says this has become a past and closed transaction, your rights regarding it have already been surrendered. The matter cannot be reopened regarding it. The Supreme Court has said this, the High Court has said this, said it many times. When this legal position came up, I wrote our written statement, and in it I didn't just say the law says so, I wrote the entire situation. I said, sir, we want to sell, they're creating these difficulties, we're saying even today bring your buyer, we're selling, we'll comply with them. Then I filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11, that this suit cannot legally proceed, it's legally barred, refiling it is barred, it should be dismissed. Then when the court was made to focus on this point, look at this, this is his suit, this is his previous suit, look at both applications, they're identical, look at both causes of action, they're identical, everything matches. Merely writing one paragraph saying they're not complying with this agreement doesn't let them refile the suit. The court accepted this, they tried to delay compliance with the law, the court dismissed the stay order that had been given, and after dismissing the given stay order, a reply to the 7/11 application was sought, and after seeking the reply, the court dismissed that suit. They filed an appeal, their appeal was dismissed, they knocked on the High Court's door, the High Court also agreed that once something is completely closed, and closed by your own hands too, all of you together, you cannot reopen it. You are accepting this agreement, therefore abiding by this agreement is the responsibility of all parties, you have no authority to file a suit again on the old cause of action, the old basis for the suit. What authority you do have is that you can file a suit for specific performance of this agreement, that, sir, this agreement was made in your court, they're not performing it specifically, its performance be enforced, or you can say, sir, this order was passed, they're deliberately violating this order, they should be charged with contempt of court because they're deliberately violating the court's order, besides these two forums you have no other forum. So keep this in mind, that when a suit is withdrawn based on a compromise, formally in the form of a written agreement, you cannot file that suit again on that cause of action, what you can do against that agreement is file a suit for specific performance, or file a contempt of court petition, and if you're on the other side, if you believe these registrations were forged but the mother pressured you, we're now at that earlier stage, we said, fine, sir, we're bound by the agreement you made, then you tell the court, sir, if they don't act on this agreement, we should be given the authority to refile a suit on this same cause of action, conditional on limitation. Conditional on limitation means: they filed a suit, it ran for a year, a year later an agreement was made, after the agreement that suit was dismissed, you also got permission that if they don't fully perform it, then on this same cause of action I have a strong cause of action, I have evidence, I only took this earlier step at my mother's request, if they don't fulfil it, I should be given the right to refile the suit. This means that, staying within the limitation period, if the limit for filing a suit is three years, and a year has already passed, and after that year the agreement was made, then he sat silent for two years, and in the fourth year came saying, sir, this order, this was my order, so I should be given the right to file a suit, then there's no right to file a suit at all. The court will say, in the first month he refused, why didn't you come, in the second month he refused, why didn't you come, right up to the year, in the eleventh month too he refused, why didn't you come, you came after two whole years, when the limitation period had already expired, the limit for filing the case had already ended, so why did you come? Why were you asleep for two years? So my humble request to you is, if you're in the right and telling the truth, keep in mind what I've told you, and whenever such a matter arises, tell your lawyer yourself, he'll find the law himself.