| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1996 SLG 191 1996 SLD 191 1996 CLC 819 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 5296 of 1995, heard on 14-11-1995
TASSADUQ HUSSAIN, JILANI, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Writ Petition No. 5296 of 1995, heard on 14-11-1995
TASSADUQ HUSSAIN, JILANI, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MUHAMMAD SALEEM
VS
DISTRICT JUDGE, MULTAN and others
Law:
Section:
(a) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)-------S. 13---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional petition--Application for ejectment of tenant---Tenant denying relationship of landlord and tenant whereupon application was dismissed by Rent Controller---Appellate Court, however, on basis of evidence on record, took contrary view and granted application for ejectment ---Validity---Tenants while appearing in evidence taking plea that house in question, belonged to his brother-in-law but in his written reply he never took such plea---No documents of title of his brother-in-law were produced in evidence---Tenant's brother-in-law also admitted in his evidence that said house was initially vacant plot which was occupied by him and a house was built thereon by him which claim was falsified for house in question, was admittedly within Municipal limits and no house could be constructed without proper sanction by Municipal Corporation which was a condition precedent--Landlord had produced rent deed as also other documents in proof of his claim of ownership---Relationship of landlord and tenant, thus, stood proved on basis of evidence on record---Tenant was liable to be ejected in circumstances. (b) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 84---Comparison of signatures by Appellate Court ---Justification--Appellate Court earlier had passed order with consent of tenant that specimen signatures should be sent . to Forensic Science Laboratory and requisite fee be paid by tenant---Subsequently tenant applied to Court that he .could not pay requisite fee---Tenant's conduct being clear violation of earlier undertaking given by him, Appellate Court was justified in proceedings to compare disputed signatures and thumb-impressions itself, hearing arguments in appeal and deciding the same---Evidence of expert witness was primarily corroborative in nature and if there was overwhelming evidence qua point in issue, recording of statement of expert witness was not essential in every case---Court was, however, not denuded of its power to compare signatures itself and finding so arrived at by such Court could not be taken exception to, merely on…
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