Law:

Section:

(a) Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)----S.17--Questions touching jurisdiction if allowed to be raised in Constitutional jurisdiction, then the express provisions of the statutory law wherein such questions had been precluded to be raised in appeal, would be defeated--High Court having not dealt with the factual and legal questions relating to jurisdiction, Supreme Court, refrained from doing so--Question of jurisdiction could more appropriately be dealt with when matter was brought up before High Court, in appeal. A question of jurisdiction can be appropriately raised by means of Constitutional petition notwithstanding the availability of an appeal and the alternate remedy. In proceedings under Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963, however, not only Tribunal has been set up for that purpose, the law itself envisages such interlocutory or jurisdictional determinations and appropriate provision and the stage has been prescribed for challenging them. The objections may be of the absence of relationship of landlord and tenant, the property being not one governed by the statute etc. Where the law takes notice of a particular situation and makes a provision for it then the legislative intent must be given effect to and respected. The interim orders which decide questions which do not conclude the proceedings or have the finality cannot under the scheme of the Cantonments Rent Restriction Act be appealed against. If all these questions touching jurisdiction are allowed to be raised by Constitutional petitions, then the same authority which has jurisdiction in appeal would be deciding those questions in Constitutional petitions when it has been precluded for questioning them in appeal. This will amount to defeating the manifest intention of the law as such. As the High Court has not dealt with the factual and legal questions relating to jurisdiction Supreme Court refrained from doing so or discussing it. This can be more appropriately done when the matter is brought up before the High Court, if at all, in appeal. Lt.-Col. Nawabzada Muhammad Amir Khan v. The Controller of Estate Duty and another PLD 1961 SC 119 Messrs Colony Textile Mills Ltd., Lahore v.…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492