Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 1539 2015 SLD 1539 2015 MLD 417
High Court (AJ&K)
Writ Petition No. 2307 of 2012, decision dated: 30-09-2013
SARDAR ABDUL HAMEED KHAN, J
Saghir Javaid for Petitioner. K.D. Khan for
Respondents

MUHAMMAD SAGHIR ABBASI

VS

DISTRICT RENT CONTROLLER and 2 others

Law:

Section:

Azad Jammu and Kashmir Rent Restriction Ordinance (XCII of 1980)-------S. 18(7)---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), S.44---Writ petition---Maintainability---Concurrent findings---Scope---Order of Rent Controller, subject to appeal if any, was final and could not be assailed in any court of law including High Court by way of suit, appeal or otherwise---Section 18(7) of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1980 had created bar to challenge the order of Appellate Court even by way of revision or appeal---Rent Controller had exclusive jurisdiction and interim orders passed by Rent Controller and upheld by the Appellate Court were not questionable by way of revision or writ petition---Concurrent findings could not be challenged by filing writ petition---Writ petition was dismissed in circumstances. PLD 1997 Lah. 1773; PLD 1983 SC (AJ&K) 204 and 1997 CLC 1822 rel. ORDER SARDAR ABDUL HAMEED KHAN, J.---Through this writ petition, the petitioner has called in question the orders of Appellate Authority (District Judge) dated 9-10-2012 and of Rent Controller Muzaffarabad dated 18-6-2012, whereby the application filed by petitioner before the Rent Controller for restoration of the ejectment petition, kept in abeyance due to litigation between the alleged owners of the rented property was rejected. The learned District Judge/appellate Authority concurred with the Rent Controller and dismissed the appeal of the petitioner. Mr. Saghir Javaid Advocate learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously argued that the impugned orders are liable to be declared passed without lawful authority and of no legal effect by granting the writ of certiorari. It was further argued by the learned counsel that the dispute of ownership of the shop has been decided by the competent Court in his favour, hence the restoration and proceedings on the ejectment application should have been ordered by the trial Court. The learned counsel submitted that the contents and grounds of the writ petition be considered as integral part of his arguments and prayer may be granted. While controverting the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner Mr. K.D. Khan…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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