LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has underscored the systemic issue of delays in execution of decrees, observing that prolonged enforcement proceedings defeat the very purpose of adjudication and reduce court judgments to “mere paper declarations”.

Dismissing a writ petition, Justice Malik Waqar Haider Awan noted that although courts may decide cases within statutory timelines, the real hardship for litigants often begins at the execution stage. The judge noted that in the present case, a family court decree passed over a decade ago had taken nearly 16 years to reach meaningful enforcement. He termed such delay contrary to the legislative intent of the Family Courts Act, 1964.

Referring to statutory provisions, the judge observed that under the law, family suits were to be decided within six months and appeals within four months.

“It would amount to a mockery of law if decrees, though passed within a stipulated time frame, remain unexecuted for an indefinite period,” the judge remarked.

Justice Awan stated that a decree-holder could only benefit from a judgment once it was executed, stressing that execution was the “fruit of a decree” and an integral part of the justice delivery process.

He regretted that unnecessary delays at this stage undermined the efficacy and credibility of the judicial system. The judge further observed that execution proceedings must not be allowed to become a “fresh round of litigation” or a tactic to frustrate rights already determined by competent courts.

He said the executing courts were under a legal obligation to ensure prompt and effective enforcement so that successful litigants were not subjected to further hardship.

The judge remarked that protracted execution proceedings disproportionately burden decree-holders, who were forced to endure additional litigation despite having secured favourable judgments after due process.

On the facts of the case, the judge declined interference, noting that the petitioner had approached the court after an unexplained delay of over one year and five months.

Dismissing the petition, the judge ruled that the counsel for the petitioner failed to point out any illegality, material irregularity or jurisdictional defect in the order passed by the executing court.

Published in Dawn, April 11th, 2026