' MUHAMMAD ALI MAZHAR, J.---On 20-4-2010 by consent order was passed and the name of defendant No,1 was deleted from the array of the defendants. On last date, Mr. Saleem Ghulam Hussain Advocate filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the defendant No,1 and along with him defendant No,1 was also present in the Court. The defendant No,1 had also filed his statement in Court in which he had clearly mentioned that neither he had sold nor intended to sell the clothes mentioned in annexures H/1 and H/3 of the plaint, at his shop. On this statement an order was passed in presence of the learned counsel. The counsel for the plaintiff also conceded to deletion of the name of the defendant No,
1. Two days after passing of this order, the counsel for the plaintiff approached the Court and stated that she had not given her consent for the deletion of defendant No,1 name and perhaps her consent has been mentioned by mistake.
' On Court motion, I issued notice to the counsel for plaintiff and defendant No,1 to appear today. Mr. Saleem Ghulam Hussain learned counsel for defendant No,1 reiterated and fully confirms that the plaintiff's counsel extended her no-objection for the deletion of the name of defendant No,1 and this is very unfortunate that after passing the order, she is denying her no-objection/consent. Now in this matter either I should hold enquiry or to simply stay my hands from this matter for future proceedings. The Court normally accepts the statement of all Advocates at bar but if the Advocates will start to deny the statement given by them in Court, then the whole purpose of accepting the statements at bar will become redundant and unreliable.
' Learned counsel for the defendant No,1 also argued that order has been passed, let plaintiff's counsel file appeal if she is aggrieved. In my view the order was in fact passed in favour of the plaintiff whereby the defendant No,1 was strictly warned to abide by his undertaking and in case of any breach, he will be exposed to the contempt of Court proceedings. Learned counsel for the plaintiff insists that let this order be continued but only her consent may be deleted from the order, which shows that the learned counsel wants to derive the benefit of the order but simply avoiding her consent which is unfair. In view of the above circumstances, I have been left with no other option but to recall my order dated 20-4-2010. Learned counsel for the defendant No,1 is at liberty to move appropriate application under Order I Rule 10, C.P.C. Let this matter be fixed before any other Bench in future.