Case Details

Citation(s)
1976 SLG 3046 = 1976 SLD 3046 = 1976 PLD 23
Peshawar High Court
F. A. O. No. 7 of 1975, decided on 19th January 1976.
Presented By: Abdul Ghani Khan Khattak, J
Haji Magsood Ahmed for Appellant. Muhammad Latif for
Respondent.      

MUHAMMAD TAYYAB Appellant

VERSUS

Mirza INAMULLAH-Respondent

Law: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)

Section: 15

(a) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)  S. 15-Appeal-Order of Rent Controller, reviewing his previous order, directing one of parties to furnish particulars of his father's legal representatives-Whether appealable under S. 15. Kandavala & Co. v. Sheikh Fayazuddin and others 1969 S C M R 720 ; Allah Ditta and others v. Muhammad Hussain and others P L D 1965 Lah. 29 and Polegar Meghavaranam Naidu and others v. A. M. Muhammad Mohideen Sahib and another A I R 1936 Mad. 782 ref. (b) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) Main consideration in framing Ordinance -Speedy disposal. The object of speedy disposal appears to be the main consideration in framing the Ordinance and with this end in view the ordinary forum of civil suits was departed from by giving special jurisdiction to the Rent Controller.            Date of hearing : 19th December 1975.                                                                                                                     JUDGMENT This appeal by Muhammad Tayyab (tenant) against the order dated 11-10-75 recorded by the learned Rent Controller arises out of the following facts:-- 2. Mirza Inamullah (Landlord) sought ejectment of Muhammad Tayyab from a shop situate in Peshawar City. In proceedings for ejectment before the learned Rent Controller, the landlord who is respondent in this appeal, omitted to implead as respondents the legal representatives of Abdul Islam, father of the appellant which was questioned by the respondent, Muhammad Tayyab appellant. Subsequently the learned Rent Controller, reviewing his previous order on the application of the landlord directed the appellant (tenant) for furnishing the particulars of the legal representatives of Abdul Islam. This order is impugned on the ground that the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register