IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

PRESENT:
JUSTICE YAHYA AFRIDI, CJ
JUSTICE MUHAMMAD SHAFI SIDDIQUI
JUSTICE MIANGUL HASSAN AURANGZEB
C.P.L.A. NO.3519 OF 2021
(Against the order dated 19.04.2021of the Lahore High Court,
Lahore passed in W.P. No.62232 of 2020)
Muhammad Naseer Butt
…Petitioner
Versus
Additional District Judge, Lahore, etc.
…Respondents
For the Petitioner: Barrister Haris Azmat, ASC

For the Respondents: Ch. Zafar Ullah, ASC (via video link
(Lahore)) for respondents No.3 and 4.
Date of Hearing: 06.05.2025

ORDER

MIANGUL HASSAN AURANGZEB, J.- The instant petition

was filed against the judgment dated 19.04.2021 passed by the

Lahore High Court in writ petition No.62232/2020 dismissing the

petitioner’s challenge to judgment and decree dated 04.11.2020

passed by the appellate court, whereby respondents No.3 and 4’s

appeal against the order and decree dated 14.05.2019 passed by

the family court, was allowed by enhancing the maintenance for

each of the said respondents from Rs.30,000/- to Rs.150,000/- per

month along with educational expenses.

2. On 14.11.2017, the petitioner’s daughters, Zeina Naseer

Butt (respondent No.3) and Imaan Naseer Butt (respondent No.4)

had instituted a suit against the petitioner for the recovery of

maintenance. Earlier the said suit had been decreed ex-parte on

15.02.2018. On the petitioner’s application, the ex-parte decree

was set aside vide order dated 08.06.2018 with the direction to the

petitioner to pay as interim maintenance Rs.30,000/- per month to

each of his daughters. Failure on the petitioner’s part to pay

interim maintenance caused the family court to invoke its powers

under Section 17-A of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964

and consequently, the suit was decreed on 14.05.2019.

3. The instant petition was filed on 06.06.2021. After remaining

pending for more than three and a half years, this court vide order

dated 15.03.2025 referred the dispute between the parties to

mediation by Ms. Sara Tarrar, who is an advocate of the High

Court and an Accredited Mediator duly notified by the Law and

Justice Division under the provisions of the Alternative Dispute

Resolution Act, 2017. The contesting parties participated in the

process of mediation and were able to arrive at a settlement. The

Mediator, along with her report dated 05.05.2025 filed a copy of

the settlement agreement, which has been taken on record. The

learned counsel for the contesting parties request for a decree to be

pronounced in terms of the said settlement agreement.

4. The purpose of detailing hereinabove the litigation history

between the parties is to underscore that the dispute between the

father/petitioner and daughters/respondents No.3 and 4 has

traversed various judicial tiers and has extensively consumed

judicial time and resources. The swift conclusion of mediation

achieved within approximately five weeks starkly contrasts with

the prolonged adversarial litigation spanning over more than seven

years (from the date of the institution of the suit to the date of

reference to mediation).

5. Mediation is not merely an alternative to litigation; it is a

paradigm shift in dispute resolution, built on the principles of

collaboration, confidentiality, and party autonomy. It offers a non-

adversarial framework that empowers parties to shape the outcome

of their own disputes, guided by a neutral facilitator rather than a

judicial determination.
C.P.L.A. NO.3519 OF 2021
-: 3 :-

6. The benefits of mediation are manifold. It reduces the costs

associated with protracted legal battles, alleviates the burden on

courts, and ensures quicker resolution of disputes. The

confidential nature of mediation protects the privacy of the parties,

and its informal setting encourages honest communication and

problem-solving. Moreover, the flexibility of the process allows

parties to explore creative, interest-based solutions that a court of

law may not be empowered to grant. These benefits were

remarkably evident in the present case. What years of litigation

could not resolve, mediation achieved within weeks. This reinforces

the principle that the earlier a dispute is channeled through

mediation, the greater the potential for cost and time savings,

reduced emotional strain, and restored relationships.

7. Courts must embrace a pro-mediation ethos, particularly at

the initial stages of litigation. Judges and lawyers must be

sensitized to identify cases fit for mediation and facilitate their

referral in a timely manner. Litigants, likewise, should be

encouraged to consider mediation and other methods of alternative

dispute resolution as a first resort, rather than a last recourse.

8. The statutory recognition and legislative frameworks

provided by the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2017, and

subsequent provincial legislations underline mediation's

established legal validity. Recent judicial directions and rules, such

as the ADR Mediation Accreditation (Eligibility) Rules, 2023 and

Mediation Practice Direction (Civil) Rules, 2023, further

consolidate mediation as a mainstream dispute resolution tool

within Pakistan’s judicial ecosystem.

9. The case at hand underscores the efficacy and benefits of

mediation, particularly in familial contexts where adversarial

litigation often exacerbates emotional distress, imposes significant

financial burdens, and strains familial ties. Had mediation been

pursued earlier, the extended litigation and accompanying costs,

both monetary and emotional, could have been substantially

mitigated or altogether avoided in the present case.

10. This court expresses its profound appreciation to Ms. Sara

Tarrar for her expert mediation, patience and diligence in

facilitating dialogue and fostering an atmosphere of mutual respect

and cooperation, culminating in a satisfactory resolution

acceptable to the contesting parties. Her contributions have vividly

demonstrated mediation’s potential to provide a timely, efficient

and humane avenue for resolving disputes.

10. For the purposes of this order, it is not necessary to restate

the terms of the settlement between the parties. A decree in terms

of the settlement agreement dated 05.05.2025 shall be drawn up

by the family court at the earliest. Office shall transmit a copy of

this order along with the settlement agreement for drawing up a

decree. This petition stands disposed of in terms of the settlement

agreement.

Chief Justice

Judge

Judge
Islamabad, the
6th May, 2025
Approved for reporting
Sanaullah*.