| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 2598 2004 SLD 2598 2004 PLD 494 |
Lahore High Court
Second Appeal from Orders Nos. 56 and 174 of 2003, heard on 24th and 25th February, 2004. dates of hearing: 24th and 25th February, 2004
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J
Ch. Khurshid Ahmad for Appellants. Ghulam Haider Al-Ghazali for
Respondents
Second Appeal from Orders Nos. 56 and 174 of 2003, heard on 24th and 25th February, 2004. dates of hearing: 24th and 25th February, 2004
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J
Ch. Khurshid Ahmad for Appellants. Ghulam Haider Al-Ghazali for
Respondents
Dr. NISAR ALI KHAN and another
VS
P.I.A. through Chairman and another
Law:
Section:
(a) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)--------Ss. 13(3) & 15---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S.107--Registration Act (XVI of 1908), Ss.17 & 49---Tenancy through unregistered document---Legality---Landlords contended that since the tenancy was created for one year through an unregistered document, therefore, it did not create or purport to create valid tenancy for a period beyond one year---Validity---Such tenancy could only be created through a registered document under S.107 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and Ss. 17 & 49 of the Registration Act, 1908---Where there was an agreement of tenancy, between the parties, which covered the period beyond one year and was not registered, it was to be considered as a tenancy valid for less than one year, and for the remaining period, the agreement shall have no legal effect. M.K. Muhammad and another v. Muhammad Abu Bakar 1993 SCMR 200 and Habib Bank Ltd. v. Dr. Muhammad Ali Siddiqui 1991 SCMR 1185 ref. (b) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)----- ----S. 13(3), first proviso---Interpretation of S.13(3), first proviso of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959---Bonafide personal need of landlord---Section 13(3), first proviso of the Ordinance refers to contracts of tenancy which are valid in law and are for specified period agreed upon between the landlord and tenant---When on account of the consequences of non-registration the contract of tenancy became invalid, there was no bar against the landlord to seek the eviction of tenant even before the period stipulated in the agreement, because such a condition would be of no legal effect---Agreement of tenancy, in the present case, was unregistered, therefore, S.13(3), first proviso of the Ordinance, could not come into play and deter the landlords, to seek eviction of tenant on the ground of personal requirement. M.K. Muhammad and another v. Muhammad Abu Bakar 1993 SCMR 200 and Habib Bank Limited v. Dr. Muhammad Ali Siddiqui 1991 SCMR 1185 ref. (c) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)----- ---Ss. 13(3) & 15---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882),…
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