PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Sher Muhammad vs Karam Hussain S — 2025 MLD 1144 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2025 MLD 1144 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
MLD
Parties
Sher Muhammad vs Karam Hussain S
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 47

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

Sher Muhammad VS Karam Hussain S. 47 & O. XXI ---Undertaking / statement given / recorded before the Court --- Enforceability --- Executing Court, powers of--- During the pendency of suit , the defendant made statement regarding settlement of claim of the plaintiff and pursuant to said statement, the Trial Court dismissed the suit being infructuous --- However , the parties kept challenging judgments and in second round of litigation the defendant approached High Court against the judgment passed by the District Court --- Petitioner/defendant recorded his statement to the effect that "he is ready to arrange for the flow of the water from the house of the plaintiffs at his own risk and costs and if he succeeds both the parties will be equally responsible to the cost of such arrangement"--- Ground agitated by the petitioner/defendant was that while he made expenses to arrange flow of water , however, his application for settlement of expenses remained undecided / unfruitful---Validity ---Record revealed that in first round of litigation, this / High Court disposed of civil revision with direction to the Trial Court to decide the application for settlement of expenses of the petitioner/defendant (which application was annexed before the High Court ) --- Pertinently , the averments of application for settlement of expenses inter alia disclosed that it was settled in presence of counsel for parties that the petitioner/defendant would construct a drain for ejection of water and expenses would be born equally; the petitioner/defendant paved a drain from his own pocket with the expenditures of Rs 20,200/ and he was entitled to recover the Rs.10,100/---Said whole episode indicated that petitioner/defendant had conceded the cause of action and legal right of drainage of sewerage water from which he could not deviate and Civil Court not only ignored this fact while passing the judgment and decree but also did not follow the spirit of order passed by the High Court in civil revision---Although the Civil Court had dismissed the suit of the respondent/plaintiff on merit, but it had failed to adjudicate upon the application which was duly brought on record and referred to in the documentary evidence---The enforceability of an undertaking given by a party before a Court is well-established in law and such undertakings can be executed by the Executing Court as if they were formal decrees---An undertaking given to a Court has the same binding effect as an injunction or Court order and its breach amounts to contempt--- Once a party submits to an undertaking, the Executing Court is empowered to enforce compliance, even in the absence of a formal decree --- Thus, an undertaking given before a Court is enforceable in execution proceedings and the Executing Court may employ all permissible means including coercive measures to ensure compliance ; this ensures that solemn commitments made before judicial forums are honored, upholding they sanctity of court proceedings and preventing abuse of process---Since the petitioner/defendant himself admitted the undertaking given before the Court and fulfilled the same by installation of 160-feet pipe, which was admitted by the witnesses of the respondent/plaintiff---Claim of the respondent / plaintiff had already been dismissed by the Trial Court, admitting the claim of the petitioner / defendant qua settlement of expenses for installation of pipe established through evidence, which had been overlooked by the Courts below---Application of the petitioner / defendant was accepted and it was to be executed by the Executing Court---High Court set-aside impugned judgments and decrees passed by both the Courts below---Revision filed by defendant was allowed accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English