1986 PLP 1696 (SCMR)
Syed TASADDAQ HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus JAFFAR KHAN and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1696 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Shafiur Rehman, JJ |
| Parties | Syed TASADDAQ HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus JAFFAR KHAN and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1696 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1696 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Shafiur Rehman, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1696 (SCMR) (Syed TASADDAQ HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus JAFFAR KHAN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Maajid Sheikh, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmad Sheikh, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 29th July, 1986.
- Abdul Maajid Sheikh, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmad Sheikh, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment/order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 11-10-1983 passed in Writ Petition No. 4073 of 1982).
Art. 185(3)--Leave to appeal--Grant of--Petition involving controversy about status of suit property--Leave to appeal having already been granted to another tenant of petitioner for examination of same question in respect of property owned by petitioner, leave granted in this case as well. Muhammad Amin v. Syed Tassaduq Hussain Shah and another Civil Petition No. 1063 of 1979 ref.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought from judgment, dated 11‑10‑1983 of the Lahore High Court; whereby a Constitutional petition, filed by the petitioner claiming to be the landlord in respect of the property in dispute against refusal of the learned Rent Controller and appellate Court to treat the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 as petitioner's tenants, on account of their finding, that the property was evacuee trust property, was dismissed. One controversy involved in this petition, amongst other questions, is regarding the status of the property in dispute. Learned counsel has brought to our notice an order passed by this Court on 10‑2‑1980 in a Civil Petition No. 1063 of 1979 (Muhammad Amin v . Eyed Tassaduq Hussain Shah and another); whereby leave to appeal was granted to Muhammad Amin another alleged tenant of the petitioner for examination of the same question, namely, the nature and character of the property owned by the petitioner. Learned counsel contends that this question in any case is going to be resolved by the Supreme Court in the other petition, therefore, the present is a fit case for leave to appeal. There is force in this contention. We accordingly grant leave to appeal in this petition. Both the appeals arising out of these two petitions are, it is directed, to be heard together. Security for costs in this case is Rs.2,
500. M. I. Leave granted.