| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2000 SLG 1775 2000 SLD 1775 2000 CLC 126 |
Lahore High Court
Second Appeal from Order Nos.70 and 71 of 1996, heard on 30-03-1998
SYED NAJAMULHASSAN KAZMI, J
Inayat Ullah Chaudhry for Appellant.
Respondent in person
Second Appeal from Order Nos.70 and 71 of 1996, heard on 30-03-1998
SYED NAJAMULHASSAN KAZMI, J
Inayat Ullah Chaudhry for Appellant.
Respondent in person
JAVED IQBAL
VS
S.M. KHURAM WASTI, ADVOCATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Administration of justice------- Law had always favoured decision on merits, rather than indulgence in technicalities---Non-suiting of parties, by strict adherence to technicalities, unless insurmountable, was not approved. (b) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)--- ----S. 13(2)(i)(ii)---Default in payment of rent and allegation of subletting--Closing of evidence of tenant---Effect---Rent Controller, after closing evidence of tenant, did not record any independent reasons for findings against issues already framed---Evidence had already been led by landlord who was under legal obligation to prove existence of default and also plea of subletting---Mere fact that evidence of tenant was closed, would not mean that allegations raised by landlord, would automatically stand proved---Since evidence had already been led, it was duty of Rent Controller to appraise entire evidence and then to record findings supported by independent reasons on the allegations of default and subletting---Rent Controller did not deal with evidence nor considered any of the oral as well as documentary evidence and proceeded to assume default and subtenancy with the remarks that evidence of tenant having been closed, he could not prove that he was not a defaulter---Order passed by Rent Controller, was perfunctory and did not satisfy requirements of law. (c) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)--- ----S. 15---Appeal---Disposal of---Requirements---Failure to adhere to such requirements---Effect---Order passed in appeal was indicative of fact that Appellate Authority did not reappraise evidence nor considered merits of decision rendered by Rent Controller nor attempted to determine as to whether findings of default and subletting of Rent Controller could sustain on evidence led by landlord---Appellate Authority proceeded to dismiss appeal after observing that tenant could not produce evidence despite being given certain opportunities---Appellate Authority under S.15 of West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 was required to decide appeal by re-appraising entire evidence as same was in fact a rehearing of entire case---Order of…
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