Legal Case Summary

Case Details
Case ID 0c29bdb5-fb71-45a6-85a6-15162f9fe74a
Body View case body.
Case Number W.P. No. 26983 of 2012
Decision Date
Hearing Date
Decision After a thorough examination of the arguments presented by both parties, the court has decided to maintain the impugned orders, judgments, and decrees issued by the lower courts. Consequently, the instant Writ Petition, along with the connected Civil Revision No.3112-2014, is hereby dismissed. The petitioner failed to provide sufficient grounds to overturn the previous decisions, and the court found no merit in the arguments to resile from the agreement to administer the special oath. Therefore, the court upholds the decisions of the lower judiciary.
Summary In the landmark case of MUHAMMAD AZAM vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND OTHERS, adjudicated by the Lahore High Court on May 23, 2018, the court delved into the complexities surrounding the Oath Act, 1873, specifically Section 10. The petitioner, Muhammad Azam, sought to resile from an agreement to decide the matter on a special oath administered by the respondent, Additional District Judge and others. The case revolved around oral exchange mutation No.4645 dated July 29, 1992, which Muhammad Sohna, respondent No.3, contested against the petitioner and the Province of the Punjab. The petitioner initially filed an application for the case to be decided on oath, but later attempted to retract this offer. The Lahore High Court meticulously examined precedents such as Saleem Ahmad v. Khushi Muhammad and Muhammad Ali v. Major Muhammad Aslam to determine the validity of such agreements. The court concluded that settlement on oath constitutes a valid agreement that cannot be easily retracted unless proven void or incapable of implementation. The petitioner’s inability to provide substantial evidence to invalidate the agreement led to the dismissal of his application. Additionally, the court addressed the procedural aspects, including the petitioner’s failure to act within the stipulated timeframe and the respondent’s credible witness testimony, which further substantiated the validity of the oath agreement. The decision reinforces the sanctity of oath-based settlements in legal proceedings, ensuring that parties remain bound by their solemn promises unless incontrovertible evidence suggests otherwise. This case underscores the importance of adhering to judicial agreements and the rigorous standards courts uphold to maintain legal integrity. Legal practitioners and entities involved in oath-based settlements can draw significant insights from this judgment, highlighting the judiciary's stance on honoring sworn agreements and the conditions under which they can be deemed void. The Lahore High Court's ruling serves as a crucial reference for future cases involving oath administration and contractual agreements within the legal framework, promoting fairness and accountability in judicial processes.
Court Lahore High Court
Entities Involved Province of the Punjab
Judges CH. MUHAMMAD MASOOD JAHANGIR
Lawyers Sh. Naveed Shehryar, Humaira Bashir Ch., Arshad Jhangir Jhojha, Irtifikhar Chohan, Imtiaz Hussain Rehan
Petitioners MUHAMMAD AZAM
Respondents ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND OTHERS
Citations 2019 SLD 139 = 2019 CLC 207
Other Citations Saleem Ahmad v. Khushi Muhammad 1974 SCMR 224, Muhammad Ali v. Major Muhammad Aslam and others PLD 1990 SC 841, Muhammad Mansha and 7 others v. Abdul Sattar and 4 others 1995 SCMR 795, Nasrullah Jan v. Rastabaz Khan 1996 SCMR 108
Laws Involved Oath Act, 1873
Sections 10