LAHORE - An appeal has been filed in the Supreme Court of Pakistan to question the compromise earlier reached between the guarantor of a principal debtor and the principal debtor and others in a bank loan recovery case. The appellant, Muhammad Yahya Akbar, the guarantor of the Principal debtor, had challenged the compromise inter alia on the ground that he neither signed nor gave any verbal or written instructions to his counsel in this respect. He prays for revocation of the compromise relying on an Apex Court decision wherein the court had allowed leave to appeal on the ground that the liability of the guarantor co-exists with the liability of the principal debtor, and that where the entire amount could be recovered from the property of the principal debtor, whether the property of the guarantor can be put to auction? As per background facts of the matter, the Banking Court had excluded the property of the petitioner/guarantor, Mr Yahya, from the auction stating that the property of the principal debtor will clear the Banks decretal amount. The principal debtor made an appeal to the Banking Court to recall the above order and to include the petitioners/guarantors property in the auction. But this was rejected by the Banking Court. The court auctioneers allegedly with malafide intention, again included the petitioners/guarantors property in the auction proceedings. The respondent in collusion with the auctioneers, who as per appellant, were related to the principal debtor, managed to keep the principal debtors property out of the auction on flimsy grounds. The main reason why bidders did not come at the auction of the principal debtors property was that a very high reserve price was kept whereas the complete opposite stand was taken vis-a-vis the property of the guarantor/petitioner. It is an established principle of law that where the entire amount can be recovered from the principal debtors property, the property of the guarantor cannot be put on auction. In this case, surprisingly, even the Lahore High Court stated in our view, the satisfaction of the decree against a customer of a bank should be through the sale/auctioning of the property of the customer/principal debtor primarily if thereafter the decree is not satisfied, the property of the guarantor be sold. But as no one turned up for the auction of property belonging to the principal debtor (because of the high reserve price as compared to the market price/decretal amount), the property belonging to the appellant/guarantor was auctioned which according to the High Court is not illegal. This matter was challenged before the Supreme Court where the alleged compromise was reached. Against the compromise in question now an appeal has been filed by Mr Yahya, under section 12(2) Civil Procedure Code (CPC) contending that he neither entered into a compromise nor gave any consent expressly or implicitly for the same. CJ seeks report from DPO in murder case Chief Justice Lahore High Court Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, taking a suo motu notice of non-submission of challan in a murder case by Bhai Pheru police Saturday directed the Member Inspection Team (MIT) to sought report from the DPO Kasur. The Chief Justice took notice on a news item published in an Urdu daily on Saturday, according to which, one Talib Hussain complainant of murder case of his brother, had alleged that the police had arrested the killers but were not filing the challan before the court.