Case Details

Citation(s)
1976 SLG 3096 = 1976 SLD 3096 = 1976 PLD 150
Lahore High Court
S. A. O. No. 412 of 1967, decided on 26th February 19.75.
Presented By: ZakiudDin Pal, J
Nemo for Appellant. G. A. Gondal for
Respondent.

MUHAMMAD ISMAIL-Appellant

VERSUS

MUHAMMAD SHARIF-Respondent

Law: Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958

Section: 30

Law: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959.

Section: 13

(a) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIIl of 1958)  S. 30 read with West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959). S. 13-Rent-Tenant liable to pay rent according to latest as sessment made subsequently-Provision of S. 30 does not give protection to tenant to continue paying rent at old rate even after change in rate by fresh assessment. F. A. Saleem v. Muhammad Yaqoob Khan 7~okhi P L D 1967 Lah. 683 and Nizam Din v. Nawab BIN P L D 1970 Lah. 923 rel. (b) Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)  S. 30 read with West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959), S. 13-Ejectment for default in payment of rent-Wilful default on part of tenant not proved-Ejectment not ordered. In circumstances of case, subject to condition that tenant pays rent of property at enhanced rate. Date of hearing: 18th February 1975.                                                                                                              JUDGMENT This second appeal is directed against the order dated 13th of October 1967, passed by the learned District Judge, Gujranwala, dismissing the appeal of the appellant. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant, Muhammad Ismail, filed an ejectment application against the respondent on the ground of default in the payment of rent with effect from 4th of August 1961. The property in question was admittedly transferred to the appellant on 4th of August 1960, and thereafter, he issued notice to the respondent under section 30 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, demanding the payment of rent at the rate of Rs. 2 per mensem. It is admitted by the appellant that after the issue of notice, the respondent has been paying rent to him at the said rate till 4th of August 1961, whereafter he stopped the payment thereof. 3. The rental value of the property in…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register