| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 423 2021 SLD 423 2021 PLJ 57 |
Islamabad High Court
W.P. No. 3940 of 2018, decided on 14.10.2020, Date of hearing: 14.10.2020.
MIANGUL HASSAN AURANGZEB, JUSTICE
Mr. Adnan Javed, Advocate for Petitioner. Ch. Naseer Ahmad Gujjar, Advocate for
Respondent No. 2. Mr. Shafqat Abbas Tarar and Raja Akhtar Iqbal, Advocates for
Respondent No. 3.
W.P. No. 3940 of 2018, decided on 14.10.2020, Date of hearing: 14.10.2020.
MIANGUL HASSAN AURANGZEB, JUSTICE
Mr. Adnan Javed, Advocate for Petitioner. Ch. Naseer Ahmad Gujjar, Advocate for
Respondent No. 2. Mr. Shafqat Abbas Tarar and Raja Akhtar Iqbal, Advocates for
Respondent No. 3.
CAPT. (RETD.) GEORGE INAYAT
VS
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGEIII, WEST, ISLAMABAD AND 2 OTHERS
Law: Islamabad Rent Restriction Ordinance, 2001
Section: 17
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Islamabad Rent Restriction Ordinance, 2001-- ----S. 17--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 199--Islamabad Rent Restriction Ordinance, 2001, S. 17--Eviction petition--Dismissed--Appeal--Allowed--Pendency of civil suit but no decree--Constitutional jurisdiction--Statement on oath--Concurrent Judgement--Inequitable conduct of petitioner--Validity--It is an admitted position that petitioner has not stood by statement that he made on oath before Executing Court--This inequitable conduct of petitioner is enough to deny him relief in Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court--I am of view that eviction or execution proceedings before Rent Controller/executing Court should not, in any manner, be hampered by mere pendency of a civil suit for declaration filed by party in possession of rented premises--Whether or not petitioner is entitled to a decree in his favour is for civil Court to determine--Presently, there is no decree with respect to ownership or lawful possession of rented premises in petitioners favour--It is trite law that a person cannot remain in occupation of rented premises simply because he asserts to be owner or in lawful possession of rented premises and has instituted a suit for declaration in this regard--There is a catena of case law in support of proposition that ejectment proceedings could not be stayed or stalled on plea that tenants in possession had filed a civil suit--Irony of situation is that eviction petition seeking petitioners eviction from rented premises was instituted as far back as 22.05.2014 and despite eviction order passed by appellate Court petitioner is still in occupation of rented premises--This Court had not suspended operation of said order--Therefore, executing Court must proceed with execution proceedings expeditiously--I do not find any jurisdictional infirmity in order passed by Appellate Court. [Pp. 59, 60, 64 65] A, B, C D PLD 1991 SC 242, PLD 1999 SC 1101 and 2000 MLD 82. ORDER Through the instant writ petition, the…
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