PLD 1978

P L D 1978 Lahore 1133 (PLP)

Haji MUHAMMAD SHAM ETC.-Appellants Versus SHAHZADI BILQIS Etc. Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
-- S. 15 (4)-Second Appeal-Contention that appellant having summoned his witnesses through Tribunal and witnesses not having appeared, Tribunal erred in not enforcing attendance of witnesses and closing evidence of appellants-Case remanded to lower Tribunal with direction to summon witnesses and enforce their attendance by all means known to law.-Second appeal.
Decided Date
S. A. Os. Nos. 650 and 669 to 677 of ,1977, decided on 18th January, 1978.
Honorable Judges
Abdul Shakurul .Salam, J.
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation P L D 1978 Lahore 1133 (PLP)
Forum / Court -- S. 15 (4)-Second Appeal-Contention that appellant having summoned his witnesses through Tribunal and witnesses not having appeared, Tribunal erred in not enforcing attendance of witnesses and closing evidence of appellants-Case remanded to lower Tribunal with direction to summon witnesses and enforce their attendance by all means known to law.-Second appeal.
Bench Members Abdul Shakurul .Salam, J.
Parties Haji MUHAMMAD SHAM ETC.-Appellants Versus SHAHZADI BILQIS Etc. Respondents
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 P L D 1978 Lahore 1133 (PLP)?

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 P L D 1978 Lahore 1133 (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the -- S. 15 (4)-Second Appeal-Contention that appellant having summoned his witnesses through Tribunal and witnesses not having appeared, Tribunal erred in not enforcing attendance of witnesses and closing evidence of appellants-Case remanded to lower Tribunal with direction to summon witnesses and enforce their attendance by all means known to law.-Second appeal. bench comprising: Abdul Shakurul .Salam, J..

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

Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1978 Lahore 1133 (PLP) (Haji MUHAMMAD SHAM ETC.-Appellants Versus SHAHZADI BILQIS Etc. Respondents). 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

  • Ch. Abdul Razzak for Appellants.
  • Muhammad Azim Butt for Respondents.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 15 (4)-Second Appeal-Contention that appellant having summoned his witnesses through Tribunal and witnesses not having appeared, Tribunal erred in not enforcing attendance of witnesses and closing evidence of appellants-Case remanded to lower Tribunal with direction to summon witnesses and enforce their attendance by all means known to law.-[Second appeal].

Judgment & Decree

Ch. Abdul Razzak for Appellants. Muhammad Azim Butt for Respondents. This order will dispose of S. A. O. No. 650 of 1977 and S. A. Os. Nos. 669 to 677 of 1977 in which attention is invited to the judgment, inter partes, of their Lordships of the< Supreme Court by which the appellants were allowed opportunity to produce their evidence before the learned Rent Controller.

2. Learned counsel for the tenant appellant inter alia contended that the witnesses summoned through the learned Rent Controller did not appear and their attendance was not enforced by the learned Court. For non- appearance of the witnesses, the evidence of the appellants should not have been closed.

3. Records were summoned and perused in the presence of the learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Mohammad Azim Butt, Advocate, who appears on behalf of the respondent. Mr. Butt has submitted that the appeals may be allowed and cases remanded to the learned Rent Controller for allowing the appellants to have their evidence recorded within a reasonable time. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants may be allowed two months time to produce their evidence and they would produce their witnesses themselves except that three witnesses, namely, Khair Din son of Mohammad Ashraf, Sbabrat Ali son of Shahadat Ali and Ghulam Rasool, son of Muhammad Sultan and those for whose attendance warrants had earlier been ordered to be issued may be made to appear through the processes of the Court. Although these appeals have not been admitted but in view of the statements of the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the orders passed by the learned Rent Controller from time to time for summoning the witnesses and their non-appearance, these appeals shall be deemed to have been admitted. They are allowed and the cases remanded to the learned Rent Controller. He is directed to allow two months time to. the appellants to examine any witness they produce. He is, further, directed that the aforementioned three witnesses, namely, Khair Din, Shabrat Ali and Ghulam Rasool and others for whose attendance warrants had earlier been issued should be summoned and their attendance enforced by all means known to law within the aforesaid period of two months and examined. Both- the parties are directed to appear before the learned Rent Controller on 21st January, 1978 on which date the learned Rent Controller may fix the cases for the purposes of recording the evidence produced and for enforcing r and examining the above-named three witnesses and for whom warrants had earlier been issued. Thereafter, he may proceed with the cases and pass fresh orders on the basis of evidence on record and law applicable thereto.

4. With .the above observations, these appeals are allowed but the parties, in the circumstances, shall bear their own costs. S. A. H. Appeals allowed.