| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 4248 2025 SLD 4248 |
Civil Petitions No. 379-L and 380-L of 2021
Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui, J.
Present: Mr. Justice Yahya Afridi, CJ Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui For the Petitioner: Mr. Mahmood A. Sheikh, Sr. ASC. (In both cases) For
Respondent No.1: Mr. Taffazul Haider Rizvi, ASC. (In both cases) For MCB: Mirza Nasar Ahmad, ASC. (Through video-link from Lahore) Date of Hearing: 18.09.2025.
Ch. Bashir Ahmad. … Petitioner (In both cases)
VERSUS
Qamar Aftab and others. … Respondents (In both cases)
Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877
Section: 56
🧾 Summary:
The petitioner filed ejectment petitions against a factory tenant. The tenant (respondent) filed applications for leave to appear and defend, but there is no record showing these were ever considered or granted. The Rent Controller dismissed the ejectment petitions, and the lower courts upheld this decision, relying on auction proceedings from a separate case involving Muslim Commercial Bank Limited.
The Supreme Court held that the lower courts were misdirected: auction proceedings and status quo orders cannot affect independent rent proceedings. The petitions were converted into appeals, the impugned orders were set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Rent Controller. The Rent Controller must first decide the leave applications and then determine the landlord-tenant relationship, independent of the auction proceedings.
âš–ï¸ Sections / Laws Used:
Section 56, Specific Relief Act, 1877 — Status quo orders do not stay independent legal proceedings.