| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1990 SLD 550 = 1990 MLD 965 |
Sindh High Court
First Regular Appeal No. 49 of 1989, decided on 28th January, 1990.
Presented By: Before Qaiser Ahmed Hamidi, J
Muhammad Ashraf Bhatti for Appellant. Rana Muhammad Ahmed Khan for
Respondent.
First Regular Appeal No. 49 of 1989, decided on 28th January, 1990.
Presented By: Before Qaiser Ahmed Hamidi, J
Muhammad Ashraf Bhatti for Appellant. Rana Muhammad Ahmed Khan for
Respondent.
SHER KHAN--Appellant
VERSUS
Messrs MASJID-E-ALLAMA IOBAL COLONY--Respondent
Law: Muhammadan Law
Section:
Muhammadan Law- --- Mosque is a juristic person---Mosque is a recognised religious institution of a permanent nature in Islam and is always known by its specific individual name--Mosque also holds movable and immovable properties, keeps accounts in its own name and even bank account is operated in its name. Moula Bux v. Hafizuddin and others A I R 1926 Lah. 372; Mosque Masjid Shaheed Ganj and others v. Shiromani Gurduwara Parbondhak Committee, Amritsar and another I L R 1940 Lah. (P.C.) 493; Sabnis, Goregaonkar and Senjit v. B.V. Nerurkar and others A I R 1937 Bom. 374; Ghulam Nabi v. Mushtaq Ahmed P L D 1980 SC 206; Abdul Majid and 7 others v. Muhammad Aslam 1981 C L C 20; Fazal Karim v. Muhammad Usman 1981 C L C 1393; Rehmatullah v. Ali Muhammad and another 1983 S C M R 1064; Muhammad Ishaq through his Legal Heirs v. S. Khurshid Alain P L D 1989 S C 353 and 1987 P Cr. L J 247 ref. Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)-- ---S. 15---Ejectment from Mosque ---Ejectment application, mantainability of-- Tenant contended that Mosque not being a juristic person and no trustee having been appointed, ejectment application through General Secretary of Mosque was not competent---Tenant, who had earlier himself sued mosque in dispute through its General Secretary by filing declaratory suit held, could not say that Mosque not being a juristic person could have filed ejectment application through its trustees only--Mosque being juristic person, ejectment application filed against tenant through its General Secretary was maintainable. Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)-- ---S. 15---Jurisdiction, objection to---Rent Controller is not bound to consider objection about his jurisdiction at a preliminary stage which objection otherwise appeared to be frivolous and baseless on face of record.--[Jurisdiction]. Akhtar Ali Pervaiz v. Altaf-ur-Rehman P L D 1963 Lah. 390; Habibullah v. Bawa Vasdevgir Chelo Shombhugar P L D 1968 Kar. 869; Banaras Khan v. Sardar Khan and,8 others 1972 S C M R 588; Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner Hyderabad Division, Kar. and another v. Mannu Khan and 3 others 1973 S C M R 62; Rehmatullah v. Ali Muhammad and another…