Law: Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963

Section: 17

Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)--- ----S. 17(8) & (9)---High Court by remand had called upon Rent Controller to record evidence of the parties on certain points including that of default and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law---Such order of the High Court would not mean that Rent Controller was debarred from taking any other action permitted by law or from passing any interlocutory order of the nature provided by S.17(8) & (9)---If any right had accrued to the parties during pendency of the proceedings they could not be stopped from ventilating such right before the Rent Controller---Remand order directing Rent Controller to record evidence of the parties and to dispose of the matter in accordance with law, had not rendered him disqualified from exercising all the powers and functions of the Rent Controller including the power to deal with matters requiring interlocutory orders. Rahmatullah v. Ali Muhammad and another 1983 S C M R 1064 distinguished: 1989CLC291 and 1988CLC311 ref. U. Niamat Moulvi for Petitioner. Shaikh Abdul Aziz for Respondent. Date of hearing: 16th August, 1989. JUDGMENT MUKHTAR AHMAD JUNEIO, J.--Under this Constitution Petition, Begum Mumtaz Riaz has challenged, the proceedings pending against her under the Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, in respect of Bungalow No. 12-B, First Central Lane, Phase-II Pakistan Defence Ofcers' Housing Authority, Karachi. Admittedly the petitioner occupied said bungalow as tenant of respondent Nos.3 and 4, who were owners of the same. Respondents No.3 and 4 have filed Rent Case No.57 of 1986 in Court of Respondent No.2 for ejectment of the petitioner. In the Rent case, the petitioner took plea that on and from 25-6-1986 she has ceased to be tenant of the Respondents Nos.3 and 4, who under a Sale Agreement dated 25-6-1986 agreed to sell to her the disputed bungalow for Rs.Ten lacs out of which   Rs.1,25,000 were paid as earnest money and the balance was payable before the District Registrar. Petitioner challenged maintainability of the rent case and jurisdiction of the Respondent No.2 to try the case and pleaded bar of section 53-A of Transfer of Property Act.…