| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1974 SLG 130 1974 SLD 130 1974 SCMR 136 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 63 of 1973, decision dated: 4th October 1973.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated the 20th December 1972 in S. A. O. No. 373 of 1972)
WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD AND SALAHUDDIN AHMED, JJ
Ch. Muhammad Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 63 of 1973, decision dated: 4th October 1973.(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated the 20th December 1972 in S. A. O. No. 373 of 1972)
WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD AND SALAHUDDIN AHMED, JJ
Ch. Muhammad Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents
MUHAMMAD SHARIF
VS
MAQBUL AHMAD AND OTHERS
Law:
Section:
Evidence Act (I of 1872)--- S. 114-Person in occupation of property transferred to another under Act XXVIII of 1958 proceeded against under S. 13 of Ordinance VI of 1959 after service of notice under S. 30 of Act XXVIII of 1958 by transferee-No denial on oath before Court about non-receipt of notice under S. 30-No need in circumstances to examine postman to prove refusal to take delivery-Presumption under S. 114, Evidence Act, 1872 could be raised-West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959), S. 13 read with Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), S. 30. Begum Humayun Zulfiqar Ismail and another v. Begum Hamida Saadat Ali 1968 S C M R 828 and Gulzar Begum v. Mst. Sairah Bibi 1972 SCMR251ref. ORDER WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-The respondents filed an application under de section 13 of Ordinance VI of 1959, against Fazal Elahi. Fazal Elahi died during the proceedings and the petitioner was substituted as his legal heir. It was alleged against Fazal Elahi that he had agreed to pay monthly rent at Rs.40 but later failed to pay the same with effect from December, 1965. It was further pleaded that the premises was required also for the personal use of the respondents. It was alleged against Fazal Elahi that a statutory notice under section 30 of Act XXVIII of 1958, was given to him and it was served on him. He refused to take it. The learned Rent Controller relied on presumption available under section 27 of the General Clauses Act, and held that the notice shall be deemed to have been served in due process of law and directed ejectment of the petitioner from the premises in dispute. The petitioner challenged this order in appeal before the learned District Judge, Rawalpindi, which was dismissed on the 4th November, 1972. The petitioner filed an appeal against the order of the learned District Judge which has been…
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