1990 PLP 916 (SCMR)
ALEEMUDDIN and another‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ASLAM and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 916 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Saad Saood Jan and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | ALEEMUDDIN and another‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ASLAM and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 916 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 916 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Saad Saood Jan and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 916 (SCMR) (ALEEMUDDIN and another‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ASLAM and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zaidi, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Dureshi, Advocate -on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 17th September, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated 18‑1‑1986, passed in W.P. No.189 of 1986). ‑‑‑S.53‑A‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Protection against ejectment ‑‑‑Leave to appeal‑‑‑Petitioners who were ordered to be ejected by Courts below from premises in dispute, contended that they had executed agreement of sale of premises with its original owner and had paid total amount to him before he surrendered same to Settlement Authorities and on basis of that transaction sought protection against their dispossession‑‑‑Contention raised by petitioners needing consideration, leave to appeal was granted. Shamini Akhtar v. Muhammad Rasheed P L D 1989 S C 575 ref.
Judgment & Decree
Zaidi, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Dureshi, Advocate -on‑Record for Petitioners. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 17th September, 1989. S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by the petitioners against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 18‑1‑1986, whereby their writ petition was dismissed. Muhammad Aslam respondent No.1 was permanently transferred the plot in dispute which was surrendered by one Bashir Ahmad, by the Settlement Authorities vide order dated 21‑11‑1982_ The petitioners were in possession of the said plot. Respondent No.1 filed ejectment application against the petitioners before the Rent Controller. The petitioners resisted the same and denied the claim of ownership and relationship of landlord and tenant of the respondent No.1 on the ground that they have executed an agreement of sale of the said plot with Bashir Ahmad and paid the total amount of the plot to him before he surrendered the same. The petitioners also sought protection of their possession over the plot in question under section 53‑A of the Transfer of Property Act. The learned Rent Controller considered the plea of the petitioners and dismissed the ejectment application of the respondent No.1. His appeal before the Addl. District Judge was accepted and the petitioners were ordered to vacate the plot in dispute vide order dated 4‑12‑1985. Constitutional petition against this order filed by the petitioners was also dismissed in limine, vide impugned Judgment. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that an agreement of sale in favour of the tenant in possession protects him against his dispossession under section 53‑A of the Transfer of Property Act and in this context he relied on a reported case "Shamim Akhtar v. Muhammad Rasheed" (P L D 1989 S C 575). The contention raised in support of this petition needs consideration and we, therefore, grant leave to appeal in this case. Security Rs.5,
000. Appeal is to be prepared on the present record, however, the parties are at liberty to file additional documents, if any H.B.T./A‑653/S Leave granted.