The Punjab & Haryana High Court affirms that when parties explicitly undertake before the court to vacate premises and pay rent by a stipulated date, failure to comply attracts liability not only under contempt jurisdiction but also for mesne profits for unauthorized occupation beyond the deadline. This judgment upholds prior directions and is binding precedent for courts in the Punjab & Haryana jurisdiction, providing clear authority in property possession and contempt proceedings.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | COCP/1690/2025 of SUNITA CHAUDHRI AND ANR Vs MS. RAVEENA AND OTHERS |
| CNR | PHHC010526862025 |
| Date of Registration | 02-04-2025 |
| Decision Date | 01-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED OF |
| Judgment Author | MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Precedent Value | Binding within Punjab & Haryana High Court jurisdiction |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms previous interim and coordinate bench orders in the same matter |
| Type of Law | Civil/Property, Contempt of Court |
| Questions of Law | Consequences of breaching a court-affirmed undertaking to vacate premises and pay rent |
| Ratio Decidendi | If a party gives a written and/or oral undertaking before the Court to vacate a premises and pay rent by a certain date, and fails to abide, the Court may hold them liable under the Contempt of Courts Act and also impose liability for mesne profits for unauthorized occupation beyond the stipulated period. Compliance undertakings before the court are enforceable, and non-compliance permits both contempt consequences and compensation for illegal use. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Respondents undertook before the Court to vacate premises and pay rent by 31.08.2025. Non-compliance would attract contempt action and liability for mesne profits post-31.03.2025. On the next date, respondents, through counsel, agreed to hand over keys and pay outstanding rent, waiving any further rights over the property. Petition disposed accordingly. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Punjab & Haryana |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and courts dealing with contempt/property disputes |
| Follows | Prior coordinate bench and interim orders issued in the same proceedings |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Express court undertakings (written/oral) to vacate premises and pay rent are enforceable both under contempt jurisdiction and for mesne profits (compensation for unauthorized use).
- If a party fails to honour such an undertaking by the agreed date, the court may order both contempt proceedings and monetary liability for mesne profits accruing after default.
- Where respondents comply prior to final order (handing over keys, paying rent), the matter may be disposed without further contempt action.
- This judgment can be cited in property and tenancy matters for enforcement of undertakings and for securing mesne profits in addition to contempt remedies.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The High Court recorded the prior undertaking made by respondents to vacate by a specified date and to pay all rent up to that date.
- It clarified in explicit terms in the prior order that non-compliance would trigger contempt action as well as liability for mesne profits for unauthorized occupation from 31.03.2025 onwards.
- At the hearing, respondents (through counsel) agreed to comply immediately—handing over keys and outstanding rent, and relinquishing any future claim.
- In light of this compliance, the court invoked its power to dispose of the contempt proceedings, resting on the respondents’ assurance and action, obviating the need for further orders.
- The court’s approach demonstrates strict compliance with undertakings given to the court and upholds the twin remedies of contempt and financial liability for breach.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner:
- Sought enforcement of the prior court order and undertaking by respondents to vacate premises and pay rent by 31.08.2025.
- Requested court action due to respondents’ alleged failure to comply with the undertaking.
Respondent:
- Through counsel, stated willingness to hand over the premises (handing over keys) and pay all outstanding rent during the day.
- Agreed not to claim any right over the property from that point onward.
Factual Background
The dispute involved possession of certain premises. By earlier court order and affidavit, the respondents had undertaken to vacate the premises by 31.03.2025 and continue paying rent until then. As the deadline passed, petitioners alleged non-compliance and filed for contempt. In an interim hearing, respondents gave a second undertaking to vacate by 31.08.2025 and pay rent up to that date or face contempt and liability for mesne profits. On the next date, respondents agreed (via counsel) to hand over the keys, settle the rent, and waive further claims, leading to disposal of the matter.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment invokes the Contempt of Courts Act, emphasizing the Court’s authority to enforce undertakings given before it.
- Addresses entitlement to mesne profits (compensation for unlawful occupation) arising after failure to vacate as per the undertaking, though without specific statutory sections cited.
- The discussion centers on the enforceability of affidavits and undertakings as binding directions of the Court.
Procedural Innovations
- The judgment clarifies that upon failure to comply with a court-accepted undertaking regarding possession and rent, the Court may simultaneously consider both contempt and liability for mesne profits in its further orders.
- Permits the matter to be closed upon timely compliance and waiver given by respondents at the hearing.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment affirms prior court directives and established principles for enforcement of court undertakings and liability for unauthorized occupation.