Case Details

Citation(s)
1995 SLG 650 1995 SLD 650 1995 SCMR 678
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 312 of 1992, decision dated: 24-01-1995.
SAJJAD ALI SHAH, C.J., MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN AND IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, JJ
Mian Younis Shah, Senior Advocate and S. Safdar Hussain, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellants. M. Aman Khan, Advocate and Nur Ahmed Khan, Advocate on-Record (absent)

MUNJRI KHAN and others

VS

FARIDOON and 5 other

Law:

Section:

(a) North West Frontier Province Tenancy Act (XXV of 1950) S. 56(1) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 Relationship of landlord and tenant Concurrent findings of fact had been arrived at by Assistant Collector, Collector and Additional Commissioner that according to entries in Revenue Record for the relevant period respondent was in possession of land in question, through appellants on payment of cash rent and that during specified harvests appellants had failed to pay him his due share---Such concurrent findings of act were not open to challenge before Board of Revenue in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction in absence of any misreading/non consideration of any material piece of evidence High Court was correct in holding that Board of Revenue by setting aside concurrent finding of fact recorded by revenue Courts as to the existence of relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, had overstepped its jurisdiction and that it could not go into the question of title Judgment of High Court being correct would not warrant interference. (b) Evidence Act ( I of 1872) S. 116 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 Appellants were inducted as tenants by respondent on land in question Denial of title of landlord by appellants Estoppel Appellants were admittedly inducted as tenants by respondents Appellants were subsequently proceeded against for recovery of rent and ejectment by respondent Appellants taking vague objection in written statement that landlord had ceased to be the owner, yet such objection had been abandoned later and it was neither reflected in issues nor in arguments before High Court Appellants were, therefore, rightly denied equitable relief in exercise of discretionary jurisdiction Induction of appellants as tenants having been admitted, they were estopped to repudiate title of their landlord viz. respondent. Muhammad Anwar v. Abdul Shakoor 1982 SCMR 1120 and Ismail Brothers v. Kevil Ram PLD 1981 SC 545 rel. S.A.A. Annamalai Chettiar v. Molaiyan and others AIR 1970 Mad. 396; Kumar Krishna Prosad Lal Singha Deo v. Baraboni Coal Concern Ltd. and others AIR 1937 PC 251; Krupasinghu Routra and another v. Purna Chandra Misra and…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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