Where an undertaking is given by a party and accepted by the court and order passed on the basis of such undertaking, the order in substance amounts to an injunction restraining the party from acting in breach thereof.—Noorali v. KMM Shetty AIR 1990 SC 464.

In a government of laws and not of men the executive branch of government bears a grave responsibility for upholding and obeying judicial order.—Mohd. Aslam v. UOI 1994 (6) SCC 442

The court must always be zealous in preserving its authority and dignity but at the same time it will be inadvisable to require compliance of an order impossible of compliance at the instance of the person proceeded against for contempt.—M.I. Khanday v. A.M. Rather 1994 (4) SCC 34

The civil court while executing a decree against a judgment debtor is not concerned and bothered whether the disobedience to any judgment and decree is willful. Once a decree has been passed it is the duty of the court to execute whatever may be the consequence thereof. But while examining the grievance of the person who has involved the jurisdiction of the court to initiate a proceeding for contempt for disobedience of its order, before such contemner is held guilty and punished, the court has to record a finding that such disobedience was willful and intentional.—Niaz Mohammad v. State of Haryana 1994 (6) SCC 332