2009 PLP 1327 (YLR)
SHER KHAN — Petitioner Versus TEHSIL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, SARGODHA through Tehsil Nazim
| Citation | 2009 PLP 1327 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mian Saqib Nisar, J |
| Parties | SHER KHAN — Petitioner Versus TEHSIL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, SARGODHA through Tehsil Nazim |
| Primary Law | Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 1327 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP 1327 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mian Saqib Nisar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 1327 (YLR) (SHER KHAN — Petitioner Versus TEHSIL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, SARGODHA through Tehsil Nazim). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shahid Mehmood Khan Khilji for Petitioner.
- Imtiaz Hussain Khan Baloch for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 42 & 54
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, Rr.1, 2
Suit for declaration and injunction
Application for grant of temporary injunction
Plaintiffs had claimed; that they had duly acquired shops in question on lease through auction; that said auction was verified and confirmed and plaintiff had deposited rental and advance etc.
Plaintiff feeling aggrieved that authorities intended to take the possession of the shops from him filed suit along with application for grant of temporary injunction, which application had been dismissed by the Trial Court and Appellate Court
Previously the rent of shops in question, which was earlier with the plaintiff was much more than the rate at which those were claimed to have been auctioned to them
Authorities in its meeting decided in clear terms that the shops should be given on rent which was more than the previous one
Arrears of rent about the previous tenancy were also outstanding against the plaintiffs
Plaintiffs were not entitled to any discretionary relief in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.-- The instant C.R. No.2290 of 2006 as also the connected Civil Revisions bearing Nos.2468 of 2006, 2469 of 2006, 2470 of 2006, 2471 of 2006 and 2472 of 2006 are being decided together, as all involve the common question of law and facts.
2. The petitioners in all the cases claim that they have participated in the open auction for acquiring on lease/rent the shops in question and being the highest bidders, they were successful. The Tehsil Municipal Administration, in its meeting of the house verified and confirmed the auction on 6-6-2005; the petitioners had also accordingly deposited the rental and the advance etc. The petitioners feeling aggrieved, that the respondents intended to take the possession from the petitioners forcibly, brought the suits, along with which they filed the applications for the grant of temporary injunction, which have been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order, dated 8-6-2006; the appeals of the petitioners also failed on 20-10-2006.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners had obtained the shops on rent through a proper and transparent process and procedure, which was verified by the house on 6-6-2005, but they are being illegally dispossessed.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and find that previously the rent of these very shops, which was earlier with the petitioners, was much .more than Rs.425 the rate at which these are now claimed to have been auctioned to them. The meeting of the house, to which reference has been made, in clear terms decided that the shops should be given on rent, which is more than the previous, but it is other way around. I have also been apprised that arrears of the rent about the previous tenancy are also outstanding against the petitioners. In the light of above, I do not find that the petitioners are entitled to any discretionary relief. All the petitions are accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./S-56/L Petition dismissed.