| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1970 SLG 3220 1970 SLD 3220 = 1970 SCMR 888 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 28-D of 1970, decided on 18th June 1970.
Presented By: Hamoodur Rahman, C. J. and M. R. Khan, J
K. M. Subhan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Md. Nurul Hug, Advocate- on-Record for Petitioner. K. A. Baker, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by A. M. Khan Chowdhury, Advocate- on-Record for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 3. Nemo for
Respondent No. 4.,
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 28-D of 1970, decided on 18th June 1970.
Presented By: Hamoodur Rahman, C. J. and M. R. Khan, J
K. M. Subhan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Md. Nurul Hug, Advocate- on-Record for Petitioner. K. A. Baker, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by A. M. Khan Chowdhury, Advocate- on-Record for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 3. Nemo for
Respondent No. 4.,
GOALUNDO FISHING INDUSTRIES-Petitioner
VERSUS
PAKISTAN AND 3 OTHERS-Respondents
Law: Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)
Section: 106
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of East Pakistan, Dacca, dated the 11th November 1969, in Appeal from Appellate Decree No. 624 of 1969). Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882) S. 106-Lease-Agree ment-Notice-Lease deed providing for termination of lease on one month's notice on either side-Contention that subject-matter of lease being manufacturing concerns six months' notice ought to have been given to effect termination of lease as enjoined by S. 106-Sec tion 106 itself, held, operates subject to agreement between parties, and parties having agreed to effect termination of lease on one month's notice, notices issued were rightly held by High Court to be lawful and valid. Date of hearing : 18th June 1970. JUDGMENT M. R. KHAN, J.---The petitioner, Goalundo Fishing Industries brought Title Suit No. 199 of 1969 in the Court of Munsif, Goalundo for declaration that the two notices Nos. 7(56) IND/ 68/183 and 7(56) IND/68/184, dated the 29th January 1969, issued by the Additional Custodian of Enemy Property (respondent No. 3 herein) are illegal, ultra vires and null and void and that the petitioner was not liable to be evicted in pursuance of the said notices. A further prayer was made for a permanent injunction restraining the respondents from taking forcible possession of the two ice factories, namely, Goalundo Ice Association Limited and Messrs. Padma Ice Factory which were the subject-matter of the suit. These two ice factories, on the migration of their owners to India, became enemy properties, and these vested in the Additional Custodian of Enemy Property under a notification issued under rule 182(6) of the Defence of Pakistan Rules. The petitioner claimed to have taken lease of these ice factories from the Additional Custodian of Enemy Property with effect from the 1st April 1968 on a monthly rent of Rs. 2,800. The petitioner got possession of the ice factories and paid rent therefore. On the 29th January 1969, the Additional Custodian issued the impugned notices. Exhs. 5 and 5(a) terminating the lease on the expiry of one month from the date of the receipt thereof by the petitioner, on the ground that the two ice…