1986 PLP (1) (SCMR)
KHUDA BUX and others — Petitioners Versus GHULAM NABI through Legal Representatives — Respondent
| Citation | 1986 PLP (1) (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Abdul Qadir Shaikh and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ |
| Parties | KHUDA BUX and others — Petitioners Versus GHULAM NABI through Legal Representatives — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution oaf Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP (1) (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution oaf Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP (1) (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Qadir Shaikh and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP (1) (SCMR) (KHUDA BUX and others — Petitioners Versus GHULAM NABI through Legal Representatives — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Maqbool Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and A. Aziz Dastgir, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 2nd June, 1986.
- Maqbool Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and A. Aziz Dastgir, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Sind High Court, Sukkur, dated 10-11-1985 in F.R.A. No. 9 of 1984).
Art. 185(3)--Sind Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979), Ss.15 & 21--Findings of facts, reached by two Courts below that petitioners were defaulters in payment of rent and thus incurred liability of ejectment under law, unexceptionable--Leave refused.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.‑‑This is a petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of a learned Judge of Sind High Court, dated 10‑11‑1985 dismissing an appeal filed by the petitioners and thereby upholding the order passed by the Rent Controller directing petitioners' eviction from the demised premises on the ground that they were defaulters in payment of rent. After having heard the learned counsel in support of the petition we find that no exception in law can be taken against the findings of the facts reached by the two Courts below that the petitioners were defaulters in payment of rent and thus incurred the liability of ejectment under the law. The petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed. M . Y . H . Petition dismissed.