Case Details

Citation(s)
1980 SLG 3327 = 1980 SLD 3327 = 1980 CLC 859
Lahore High Court
Second Appeal from Original Order No. 732 of 1978, decided on 17th October, 1979.
Presented By:  Muhammad 1lyas, J
Ch. Hamid-ud-Din for Appellant. Ch. Tajammal Murad for
Respondents,

Ch. WALI MUHAMMAD-Petitioner

VERSUS

NOOR A14MAD SHAH AND 7     OTHERS-Respondents

Law: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959.

Section: 13 (6)

West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) S. 13 (6)--Ejectment petition-Rent Controller directing arrears for a certain period to be deposited before a stipulated date-Deposits relating to period preceding such stipulated date, held, cannot be adjusted towards arrears determined by Rent Controller due to claim in their regard having become time-barred.-[Limita tion]. bates of hearing : 16th and 17th October, 1979.                                                                                                                       JUDGMENT The facts giving rise to this second appeal are that the appellant, Ch. Wali Muhammad filed an application, under section 13 of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance, for ejectment of Hakim Pir Fateh Shah from a house. Hakim Pir Fateh Shah died during the pendency of the ejectment proceedings whereupon the respondents, Noor Ahmad Shah and others were brought. on the record as his legal representatives. On 18th December, 1,976, the respondents were directed, under the first part of subsection (6) of section 13 of the Ordinance, to deposit rent at the rate of Rs. 25 p. m., with effect from 21st October, 1961, amounting to Rs. 4,550 before 18th February, 1977 as also future rent at the said rate. The respondents, however, deposited Rs. 2,700 and not Rs. 4,550 as directed. Therefore, the Rent Controller, who had made order regarding the deposit of rent, struck off their defence and ordered their ejectment. On this, the respondents went in appeal before an Additional District Judge who, while accepting the appeal, set aside the order of ejectment passed against the respondents and remanded the case to the learned Rent Controller for its disposal on merits. The appellant has, therefore, filed this second appeal to challenge the order of learned Additional District…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register