1987 PLP 1538 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. HAMEEDA BEGUM‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1987 PLP 1538 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Abdul Kadir Sheikh, S. A. Nusrat and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. HAMEEDA BEGUM‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Sind Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 1538 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Sind Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 1538 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Kadir Sheikh, S. A. Nusrat and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 1538 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. HAMEEDA BEGUM‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nasim Farooqi, Advocate Supreme Court and S.M. Abbas, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 12th December, 1983.
- We would like to hear learned Advocate‑General Sind. Notice to issue to him.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Sind at Karachi dated 22‑5‑1983 passed in F.R.A. No. 460 of 1981). ‑‑‑S. 14‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider question as to whether for purpose of availing the benefit of S. 14, Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, the applicant must be full owner of demised premises or such benefit can also be extended to a co‑owner who may be a widow, a minor whose both parents are dead, or a salaried employee due to retire within six months, or a person who is due to attain the age of 60 years or has attained the age of 60 years.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.‑‑The question for consideration, inter alia, in this case is whether for the purpose of availing the benefit of section 14 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 the applicant must be the full owner of the demised premises, or, in other words, such benefit can also be extended to a co‑owner who may be a widow, a minor whose both parents are dead, or a salaried employee due to retire within six months, or a person who is due tai attain the age of 60 years, or has attained the age of 60 years. This being a substantial question of law deserves consideration by this Court. Leave is granted and the petition is allowed. Security Rs.2,
500. Appeal will be heard in January 1984 on the present record. It is open to the parties to file additional documents, if any. Petitioner shall not be evicted from the demised premises till appeal is decided provided he continues to deposit rent in Court in terms of the orders passed in the case. We would like to hear learned Advocate‑General Sind. Notice to issue to him. S.Q./M‑138/S Leave granted.