1986 PLP 279 (SCMR)
A1‑Haj S.M. NOOR & SONS‑‑Petitioner Versus BEGUM ZEENAT SULTAN KHAN‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1986 PLP 279 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain, Nasim Hasan Shah, Abdul Kadir Shaikh and M.S.H. Quraishi, JJ |
| Parties | A1‑Haj S.M. NOOR & SONS‑‑Petitioner Versus BEGUM ZEENAT SULTAN KHAN‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 279 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 279 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain, Nasim Hasan Shah, Abdul Kadir Shaikh and M.S.H. Quraishi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 279 (SCMR) (A1‑Haj S.M. NOOR & SONS‑‑Petitioner Versus BEGUM ZEENAT SULTAN KHAN‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Faizanul Haq, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. M.S. Ghaury, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 25th September, 1984.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Sind High Court at Karachi, dated 11‑3‑1984 passed in First Rent appeal No. 179 of ‑1982). Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ ‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Sind Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979), S.21‑ Appeal‑‑Appeal against ejectment order not pressed on merits Petitioner obtained six months' time to vacate premises and subsequently filed petition for leave to appeal challenging dismissal of hi, appeal by High Court‑‑Held: Petitioner had no right to challenge High Court's order on merits‑‑‑Petition dismissed as frivolous filed only to gain time.
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑-This petition is directed against the order of the Sind High Court, dated 11‑3‑19134 dismissing the petitioner's appeal in a rent matter. The petitioner was ordered to be evicted from the premises in question by the orders of the Rent Controller, Karachi, dated 16‑1‑1982. Feeling aggrieved he went up to the High Court in appeal against the said order. But before the High Court he did not press the appeal and merely requested for further time to vacate the premises. He was, therefore, granted six months' time for that purpose. But he has now filed the present petition, challenging the dismissal of his appeal by the High Court. After hearing the counsel and going through the record we feel that this is a frivolous application filed merely to gain more time. The petitioner had himself not contested the appeal on merits before the High Court. He has, therefore, no right to challenge the High Court orders on merits through a petition before this Court. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. M. I. Leave refused