Case Details

Citation(s)
2003 SLG 2745 2003 SLD 2745 2003 CLC 1631
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petition No.S-963 of 2002, decision dated: 5-04-2003.
S. ALI ASLAM, JAFRI, 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

Mst. KHALIDA FAROOQ

VS

Law:

Section:

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-------Art. 199---Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Such jurisdiction of High Court is not an alternate of second appeal or revision. (b) Discretion--- ----Discretion of Court or Tribunal---Scope---If a Court or Tribunal has jurisdiction to decide certain issue; the discretion so vested in it should be exercised in accordance with the settled principle of law. Muhammad Sharif and another v. Muhammad Afzal Sohail and others PLD 1981 SC 246 and Utility Stores Corporation of Pakistan Limited v. Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal and others PLD 1987 SC 447 ref. (c) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Art. 199---Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court ---Scope--­Erroneous decision of Tribunal---Scope---Where Tribunal makes an error of law in deciding matter before it, such matter goes outside the jurisdiction of the Tribunal and, therefore, determination of the Tribunal which is shown to be erroneous on a point of law can be quashed under Constitutional jurisdiction on the ground that the same is in excess of its jurisdiction. Muhammad Hussain Munir's case PLD 1974 SC 139 and Zulfiqar Khan Awan's case 1974 SCMR 530 ref. (d) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Non-availability of right of second appeal---Effect---Where, in appropriate cases, it is shown that determination of Tribunal is erroneous on the point of law, arbitrary or result of non-reading of material on record, High Court can exercise its jurisdiction under Art.199 of the Constitution. (e) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)- ----S. 15---Bona fide personal need of landlady--Rent Controller allowed the ejectment petition but the Appellate Court dismissed the same--­Tenant agreed to pay enhanced rent but the landlady declined to accept the same and stated before High Court that the demised shop was required by her for personal bona fide use by her husband---Landlady showed before High Court, her willingness to pay Rs.3,00,000 to the tenant on account of security deposit and payment of electricity charges etc. though she was not liable to pay anything in excess to the amount of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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