| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2000 SLG 744 2000 SLD 744 2000 SCMR 226 2000 SLD 1156 2000 SCMR 226 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos.75-Q and 76-Q of 1994, decision dated: 20-07-1999.
SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, C.J., MUNAWAR AHMED MIRZA AND SH. RIAZ AHMED, JJ
Tariq Mahmood, Advocate Supreme Court and M.W.N. Kohli, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants. M.K.N. Kohli, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 2 (in C.A. No. 75-Q of 1994). M.K.N. Kohli, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 1 (in C.A. No. 76-Q of 1994)
Civil Appeals Nos.75-Q and 76-Q of 1994, decision dated: 20-07-1999.
SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, C.J., MUNAWAR AHMED MIRZA AND SH. RIAZ AHMED, JJ
Tariq Mahmood, Advocate Supreme Court and M.W.N. Kohli, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants. M.K.N. Kohli, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 2 (in C.A. No. 75-Q of 1994). M.K.N. Kohli, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent No. 1 (in C.A. No. 76-Q of 1994)
Qari ABDUL REHMAN and 6 others
VS
JAMALUDDIN and another
Law:
Section:
West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)--S. 13(6)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art 185---Non-compliance of tentative rent order---Striking off defence---Tenants were directed to deposit rent under S. 13(6), West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 till disposal of appeal---Tenants continued depositing rent in name of original landlord up to certain period but thereafter started depositing rent in the name of person other than the landlord---Such deposit of rent could not be a proper deposit in terms of S. 13(6), West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959---Tenants having failed to comply with tentative rent order, their defence was rightly struck off and they were directed to be ejected from premises in dispute. PLD 1980 SC 9 and 1991 SCMR 429 ref. JUDGMENT SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, C.J.---We propose to dispose of abovementioned 2 civil appeals by common judgment as questions of law and facts involved in these appeals are similar. Leave was granted in Civil Appeal No. 75-Q of 1994 to consider, inter alia, whether the respondents, who were inducted in the shops/Khokhas in dispute as tenants by the appellants can challenge their title to the property in dispute while in Civil Appeal No.76-Q of 1994 leave was granted to consider whether the deposit of monthly rent of the shop/khokha by the respondents in favour of Safeer Masjid and not in the name of the appellants, was a proper deposit in terms of section 13(6) of Balochistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, .1959 (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Ordinance'). ' The relevant facts of the cases are that respondents in the abovementioned two appeals are the tenants of the appellants. It is admitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that they were inducted in the 2 Khokhas in their respective possession bearing No.4-25/1127-C and 4/25/1127-d MeConghy Road, Quetta (hereinafter to be referred as the 'suit property') by the predecessor-in-interest of the appellants Maulvi Jan Muhammad. It is an. admitted position that by Notification, dated 25th of September, 1983, issued by Government of Balochistan, Auqaf Department, Khasra No.3681 measuring 1328 sq.ft…
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