NOOR MUHAMMAD vs MUHAMMAD SHAFI And Other
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan via a petition for leave to appeal, challenging the decision of the High Court which held that a statement made by a counsel during an interlocutory matter disposing of the entire suit is binding on the represented party. The core legal question revolves around the extent of a counsel's authority to bind their client through statements made in interlocutory proceedings that ultimately dispose of the main suit. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the High Court's view was correct in the facts and circumstances of the case, thereby affirming that a counsel can competently make such statements and bind the party represented. The key principle laid down is that a party is bound by the statements and concessions competently made by their counsel in judicial proceedings.
- Can a statement made by a counsel in connection with an interlocutory matter bind the represented party where the entire suit is disposed of?
- Whether a party is bound by the statements made by their counsel during judicial proceedings?
ORDER
1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--The question raised in this petition is whether the statement, made by the counsel of a party while appearing in connection with an interlocutory matter, where under the entire suit was liable to be disposed of, could bind the said party?
2. The High Court has, after carefully examining all the circumstances of this case and relying on two reported judgments of the Lahore High Court, held that the counsel could competently have made the statement in question and the party represented by the said counsel will be bound by his statement.
3. The above view is disputed before us through this petition for leave to appeal.
4. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record we see no reason to differ with the view expressed by the High Court in the facts and circumstances of this case.
5. This petition is dismissed.