CLC 1981

981 PLP 689 (CLC)

BASHIR AHMED‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD BASHIR‑MUHAMMAD NAZIR & Co.‑ Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Second Appeal from Original Order No. 290 of 1975, decided on 16th October, 1979.
Honorable Judges
Khurshid Ahmad, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 981 PLP 689 (CLC)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Khurshid Ahmad, J
Parties BASHIR AHMED‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD BASHIR‑MUHAMMAD NAZIR & Co.‑ Respondent
Primary Law West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 981 PLP 689 (CLC)?

This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 981 PLP 689 (CLC)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Khurshid Ahmad, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 981 PLP 689 (CLC) (BASHIR AHMED‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD BASHIR‑MUHAMMAD NAZIR & Co.‑ Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)‑

Representation

  • A. R. Shaukat Ali and M. Yunus Bhatti for Petitioner.
  • Ch. Muhammad Iqbal for Respondent.
  • Dates of hearing: 8th and 10th October, 1979.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 13(3) (a) (ii)‑EvictionPremises held by a firm‑A firm has a separate existence from its partners though it does not acquire a, corporate statusFirm's existence being different from that of its partners for purposes of S. 13(3) (a) (ii) of Ordinance, words `for his own occupation' cannot be relegated to any of its partners or their sons‑Premises owned by a firm, held, can only be got vacated for use by firm and not for use of a son of any partner. Akhtar All v. Umatul Islam P L D 1979 S C 816 and Messrs Fankson & Co. v. Muhammad Hussain P L D 1973 Notes 141 at p. 213 fol. Miss 1. Ali Muhammad v. Muhammad Shafi P L D 1971 S C 494; Dr. Pershotem v. Ferozeshah and others P L D 1962 Kar. 293; Motal Bai v. Abdul Aziz and others P L D 1968 Kar. 635; Mr, B. A. Sheikh v. The Custodian, Evacuee Property, West Pakistan and another P L D 1960 S C 330 Yaqoob v. Additional Ejectment Commissioner, Karachi 1973 S C M R 116 and Surgan & Company v. Landhu Ram Bal Kishan Das A I R 1941 Nag. 105 ref.

Judgment & Decree

Second Appeal from Original Order No. 290 of 1975, decided on 16th October, 1979. S. 13(3) (a) (ii)‑EvictionPremises held by a firm‑A firm has a separate existence from its partners though it does not acquire a, corporate statusFirm's existence being different from that of its partners for purposes of S. 13(3) (a) (ii) of Ordinance, words `for his own occupation' cannot be relegated to any of its partners or their sons‑Premises owned by a firm, held, can only be got vacated for use by firm and not for use of a son of any partner. Akhtar All v. Umatul Islam P L D 1979 S C 816 and Messrs Fankson & Co. v. Muhammad Hussain P L D 1973 Notes 141 at p. 213 fol. Miss

1. Ali Muhammad v. Muhammad Shafi P L D 1971 S C 494; Dr. Pershotem v. Ferozeshah and others P L D 1962 Kar. 293; Motal Bai v. Abdul Aziz and others P L D 1968 Kar. 635; Mr, B. A. Sheikh v. The Custodian, Evacuee Property, West Pakistan and another P L D 1960 S C 330 Yaqoob v. Additional Ejectment Commissioner, Karachi 1973 S C M R 116 and Surgan & Company v. Landhu Ram Bal Kishan Das A I R 1941 Nag. 105 ref. A. R. Shaukat Ali and M. Yunus Bhatti for Petitioner. Ch. Muhammad Iqbal for Respondent. Dates of hearing: 8th and 10th October, 1979.