| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1974 SLG 3018 = 1974 SLD 3018 = 1974 SCMR 504 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 42 and Civil Petition No. 196 of 1972, decided on 28th March 1974. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated the 10th April 1972, in L. P. A. No. 76 of 1969).
Presented By: Muhammad Yaqub Ali, Salahuddin Ahmed and Anwarul Haq, JJ.
Petitioner in person. Ifrtkhar Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 42 and Civil Petition No. 196 of 1972, decided on 28th March 1974. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated the 10th April 1972, in L. P. A. No. 76 of 1969).
Presented By: Muhammad Yaqub Ali, Salahuddin Ahmed and Anwarul Haq, JJ.
Petitioner in person. Ifrtkhar Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent.
Syed AKHLAQUE HUSSAIN-Appellant
VERSUS
HABIB ISMAIL BAJWA, ADVOCATE-Respondent
Law: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959.
Section: 13(6)
West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) S. 13(6)-Determination of rent-Order provisionally fixing rent in event of dispute about its rate and deposit-Merely an interim order-Rent Controller statutorily bound to finally determine rent -Proceeding dogs not legally conclude until rent finally determined. The order provisionally fixing the rent in the event of a dispute about the rate and its deposit is an interim or interlocutory order. Under the second part of section 13 (6) the statutory duty is cast on the Rent Controller to finally determine the rent, and until this act is performed, the proceeding does not legally conclude. The Supreme Court felt unable to accept the contention advanced on behalf of the respondent that the Legislature regarded the passing of the order of eviction as the last or ultimate act of the Rent Controller which put an end to the proceeding for eviction under sec-ion 13 of the Ordinance and the Rent Controller thereafter was precluded from finally determining the rent as required under the said Ordinance. It is not correct that the passing of the order of eviction by the Rent Controller had the effect of making the Rent Controller functus of to so that he could not thereafter finally determine the rent. Date of hearing : 28th March 1974. JUDGMENT SALAHUDDIN AHMED, J.-The petitioner has become aggrieved by an order of the Rent Controller, rejecting the former's application for finally determining the rent under section 13(6) of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959. The Rent Controller was of the view that having already struck off the defence of the tenants and passed the order of ejectment, he no longer possessed any jurisdiction to finally determine the rent. Both the respondents…