1990 PLP 750 (SCMR)
Mst. FATIMUN-NISA and others — Petitioners Versus Mrs. ZUBAIDA — Respondent
| Citation | 1990 PLP 750 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Abdul Kadir Shaikh, S.A.Nusrat and ZaffarHussain Mirza, JJ |
| Parties | Mst. FATIMUN-NISA and others — Petitioners Versus Mrs. ZUBAIDA — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Sind Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 750 (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 1990 PLP 750 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Kadir Shaikh, S.A.Nusrat and ZaffarHussain Mirza, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 750 (SCMR) (Mst. FATIMUN-NISA and others — Petitioners Versus Mrs. ZUBAIDA — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Suleman Kassam, Advocate Supreme Court and A. Aziz Dastagir, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 22nd February, 1984.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 21
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
Tenant evicted on ground of his failure to deposit rent of premises by appointed date, asserted by producing medical certificate that he could not deposit rent due to illness
High Court accepted plea of tenant and condoned delay in deposit of rent
Delay in deposit of rent having been condoned by High Court in lawful exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction
Leave to appeal was refused against the order of High Court.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.
The Rent Controller, Karachi by the order dated 26-5-1982 directed respondent's eviction from demised premises on the ground that she had failed to deposit arrears of rent in Court by 10-11-1981 in terms of the earlier order dated 28-10-1981 passed by him. On appeal by respondent, a learned Judge of Sind High Court set aside the order of the Rent Controller, accepting the plea raised by learned counsel for the respondent that the delay in the deposit of rent in Court was due to the reason that he was not aware of the order dated 28-10-1981 as he had failed to attend the Court that day due to illness. He produced a medical certificate in support of his assertion that he was ill on 28-10-1981. Since we find that the High Court has condoned the delay in the deposit of rent by respondent in the lawful exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction, this is j not a fit case for interference by this Court. The petition is dismissed in limine. H.B.T./F-164/S Petition dismissed.