1. These revision petitions are filed by the common revision petitioner aggrieved by the orders dated 25th February 1999 in LA. 407 of 1999 in O.S. 787 of 1997 and LA. 406 of 1999 in O.S. 789 of 1997.

2. Those suits were filed by the revision petitioner against the respondents for specific performance of two agreements for sale and in the alternative for return of the amount paid as advance. During the pendency of the suits the matter was settled between the parties and the settlement was reported to the Court. The plaintiff, in view of the settlement, did not want to further prosecute the suits. It was in these circumstances that the plaintiff reported settlement to the Court and did not choose to prosecute the suits.

3. The Court accepted the statement of the contestants. In one suit (O.S. 787 of 1997) it was specifically endorsed that the matter is settled between the parties. It was prayed that the suit may be dismissed and half court fee may be refunded. That endorsement is made by both Counsel. In the other there was only a statement made at the bar. The Court accepted the said statements and proceeded to dismiss the suits. There was no specific direction in the Jud