| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1974 SLG 3037 = 1974 SLD 3037 = 1974 PLD 446 |
Lahore High Court
S. A. O. No. 107 of 1970, heard on 19th October 1973.
Presented By: Sardar Muhammad Iqbal, C J
Abdul Ghafoor v. Ahmad Kunhi P L D 1969 S C 424 ref. Ch. Muhammad 1qbal for Appellant. Ch. Muhammad Sadiq Bhatti for
Respondents.
S. A. O. No. 107 of 1970, heard on 19th October 1973.
Presented By: Sardar Muhammad Iqbal, C J
Abdul Ghafoor v. Ahmad Kunhi P L D 1969 S C 424 ref. Ch. Muhammad 1qbal for Appellant. Ch. Muhammad Sadiq Bhatti for
Respondents.
MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN-Appellant
VERSUS
MUHAMMAD BASHIR AND 4 OTHERS-Respondents
Law: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959.
Section: 13(6), 15(4)
Law: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958
Section: 22
(a) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) Ss. 13 & 15-Issue whether relationship of landlord and tenant exists- Rent Controller holding that relationship did not exist and thus dis missing petition-Appeal against order of Rent Controller-Contention that unless finding be in affirmative Rent Controller could not be said to have assumed jurisdiction and as such order dismissing petition on ground that relationship of landlord and tenant did not exist could not be said to be an order under S. 13 so as to be appealable under S. 15----- Held : Decision that relationship of landlord and tenant did not exist was given by Rent Controller when in seisin of matter under S. 13 ; appeal under S. 15 therefore, competent. The petitions for ejectment filed before the Rent Controller under sec tion 13 of the Ordinance, 1959 were based on the averments that relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the parties. When the respondents took objection that they were not tenants, the Rent Controller had to examine this question. The decision that the relationship of landlord and tenant did not exist between the parties was given when the Rent Controller had seisin of the matter under section 13. The employment of the words and letters "under section 13" in section 15 was not in the restricted sense to cover only an order passed by a Rent Controller in a case where the relationship of land lord and tenant is admitted or proved. They are to be read in the context in which the same were used and have to be understood in full comprehension to mean any order passed in respect of an action which is initiated or purported to have been taken under section 13, or an order passed in the course of proceedings under section 13, or an order which is passed in the proceedings of which the Rent Controller could not take cognizance but for the provisions in section 13. Any other interpretation would lead to uncertainty and may frustrate the very intention of the Legislature that the disputes between the landlords and tenants should be decided expeditiously and the procedure adopted in resolving them should be simplified. If the contention of the…