| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 84 2015 SLD 84 2015 PLD 226 |
Lahore High Court
F.A.O. No. 16 of 2016, decided on 13th November, 2013
ATIR MAHMOOD, J
Waseem Shahab and Muhammad Ali Siddiqui for Appellant. Mudassar Altaf Qureshi for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Nemo for
Respondents Nos.3 to 8.
F.A.O. No. 16 of 2016, decided on 13th November, 2013
ATIR MAHMOOD, J
Waseem Shahab and Muhammad Ali Siddiqui for Appellant. Mudassar Altaf Qureshi for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Nemo for
Respondents Nos.3 to 8.
HASHMAT TAJ
VS
Mrs. SURAYYA TARIQ and others
Law: Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963
Section: 24,17
(a) Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)--- ----Ss. 24 & 17---Ejectment petition---Appeal---Maintainability---"Aggrieved party"---Scope---Petitioner moved application for impleading him as a party but same was dismissed on the ground that he had no "locus standi"---Contention of petitioner was that he was sub-tenant and was occupying the demised premises under agreement executed by the original tenant---Validity---Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963 was a special law which would prevail upon the general law---Petitioner did not fall within the interpretation of term "aggrieved party" as party could be a person aggrieved but a person who might be affected by a or order of a lis could not be considered as an "aggrieved party"---Petitioner had entered into the property in dispute during the pendency of eviction petition and was not sub-tenant at the time of filing of the same---Petitioner had no rent agreement in his favour rather he had sale agreement in his favour executed by the original tenant who had no authority to enter into such agreement on behalf of landlord---Petitioner was approbating and reprobating at the same time---Rent agreement and agreement to sell were two different things---Petitioner could not claim ownership over the demised premises if he was sub-tenant and could approach the competent court for redressal of his grievance against the original tenant---Petitioner had no locus standi to file present appeal---Impugned order had attained finality---Appeal was not maintainable and same was dismissed accordingly. Meraj Gul v. Rukhsana Ameen and others 2013 PLC (C.S.) 1089; Dr.Abdul Hafeez v. Province of Punjab through the Secretary Education, Lahore and others PLD 1991 SC 165; Begum Humayun Zulfiqar Ismail and another v. Begum Hamida Saadat Ali 1968 SCMR 828;, Siraj Din and others v. Additional District Judge, Okara 1986 CLC 975 and Ch. Nazir Ahmad v. Mrs. Mariam Salauddin Khawaja and others PLD 1994 Lah. 252 ref. Meraj Gul v. Rukhsana Ameen and others 2013 PLC (C.S.) 1089; Dr.Abdul Hafeez v. Province of Punjab through the Secretary Education, Lahore and others PLD 1991 SC 165; Begum Humayun Zulfiqar Ismail and another v. Begum…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492