1983 PLP 666 (SCMR)
MERAJ DIN-Petitioner Versus DISTRICT JUDGE, MULTAN AND OTHERS-Respondents
| Citation | 1983 PLP 666 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MERAJ DIN-Petitioner Versus DISTRICT JUDGE, MULTAN AND OTHERS-Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983 PLP 666 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1983 PLP 666 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1983 PLP 666 (SCMR) (MERAJ DIN-Petitioner Versus DISTRICT JUDGE, MULTAN AND OTHERS-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Dr. A. Basit, Advocate Supreme Court and Hamid Aslam Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 6th February, 1983.
- Dr. A. Basit, Advocate Supreme Court and Hamid Aslam Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated 5th June, 1982 in W. P. 569/82). -- Art. 183 (3) read with West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959), S. 13-Ejectment proceedings-Leave to appeal-Granted to examine (i) whether defence of petitioner tenant could be struck off on ground of his misconduct in produc tion of evidence and (ii) whether a decision on merits of case should have been rendered trusting it on ex parte action.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑Two questions arise for examination in this petition for special leave to appeal against orders of petitioner's eviction (a) whether the defence of the petitioner tenant could be struck of on the ground of his misconduct in the production of evidence or his case could only be closed by the order of the Court ; and, (b) whether it was not necessary, in the circumstances of the case, that a decision on the merits of the case should have been rendered treating it, at the most an ex parte action "and in that eventuality, what would have been the result of such an exercise. We accordingly grant leave to appeal. Security Rs. 2,
000. Appeal to be prepared on the present record with liberty to the parties to file additional documents.