| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2000 SLG 1812 2000 SLD 1812 2000 CLC 376 |
Lahore High Court
First Appeal from Order No.23 of 1991, heard on 29-09-1999
SYED NAJAMULHASSAN KAZMI, J
Syed Muhammad Ali Gillani for Appellant. Pir Muhammad Asif Rafi-ud-Din Shah for
Respondent
First Appeal from Order No.23 of 1991, heard on 29-09-1999
SYED NAJAMULHASSAN KAZMI, J
Syed Muhammad Ali Gillani for Appellant. Pir Muhammad Asif Rafi-ud-Din Shah for
Respondent
ASHIQ HUSSAIN
VS
NIAZ MUHAMMAD
Law:
Section:
(a) Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)-------S. 17(4), proviso---Use of rented premises as hotel, Sarai, lodging houses ---Ejectment of tenant from such premises---Service of mandatory notice---Benefit of proviso to S.17(4) of Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963---Scope---Tenant was duty bound to prove that the premises was being used as hotel, at the time of commencement of Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963, or the same was let out for hotel expressly, with the consent in writing of landlord---In absence of any consent in writing, the tenant could not claim any benefit of the proviso to S.17(4), Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963. (b) Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)--- ----S. 17(4)---Ejectment petition---Maintainability---Non-service of two years' prior notice---Effect---Basic purpose for which the property was let out was relevant as such the subsequent use of the property as hotel was not material---Any subsequent conversion of the use by the tenant without the written consent of the landlord could not justify raising of objection to the maintainability of ejectment petition---Where the tenant failed to establish any existence of such written consent of landlord, the ejectment petition was maintainable. Lt.-Col. (Retd.) Muhammad Hassan Safdar v. Malik Shabbir Ahmed and another 1994 CLC 286 and Kamil Khan and another v. Government of Sindh through Deputy Commissioner, Sanghar and 22 others PLD 1998 Kar. 268 ref. (c) Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)--- ----S. 17---Ejectment of tenant---Non-issuance of notice to tenant ---Effect--Where notice was required, the ejectment petition itself could have been treated as a notice. Aziz Begum v. Faiyaz Butt 1991 CLC htite 9 at p.6 ref. (d) Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)--- ----S. 17---Premature ejectment petition---Effect---Where any such petition was matured during the pendency of the case, the Rent Controller was not denuded of his power to decide the case on merits. Abdul Razaq v. Abdul Hamid 1979 SCMR 534 and Raj Muhammad and 11 others v. Haji Muhammad Zareen and 3 others 1980 SCMR 339 rel. (e) Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)--- ----S:…
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