2014 PLP 984 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ASLAM QURESHI — Petitioner Versus Mrs. MOEENA HIDAYATULLAH and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2014 PLP 984 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Anwar Zaheer Jamali and Ghulam Rabbani, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASLAM QURESHI — Petitioner Versus Mrs. MOEENA HIDAYATULLAH and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2014 PLP 984 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2014 PLP 984 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Anwar Zaheer Jamali and Ghulam Rabbani, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2014 PLP 984 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ASLAM QURESHI — Petitioner Versus Mrs. MOEENA HIDAYATULLAH and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Qadir Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 4th July, 2011.
- ANWAR ZAHEER JAMALI, J.---Learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that in so far as findings of fact in rent case are concerned, Rent Controller and the First Appellate Court in terms of section 21 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979 are the final authorities to record such findings, which are not open to question before the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction in terms of Article 199 of the Constitution, but, contrary to it, in the instant case, concurrent findings of the two Courts below have been up set by the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution, that too without any plausible and lawful justification for doing so. In order to fortify his submission as regards this legal position, he has placed reliance upon the case of Shakeel Ahmed v. Muhammad Tariq Farogh (2010 SCMR 1925).
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from judgment of High Court of Sindh, Karachi dated 26-4-2011 passed in C.P. No.207 of 2010)
S. 21
Constitution of Pakistan Arts. 185(3) & 199
Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court
Scope
Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to examine the contention of the petitioner that as far as findings of fact were concerned, Rent Controller and First Appellate Court in terms of S. 21 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 were the final authorities to record such findings, and the same were not open to question before the High Court in exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction under Art. 199 of the Constitution. Shakeel Ahmed v. Muhammad Tariq Farogh 2010 SCMR 1925 ref.
Judgment & Decree
ANWAR ZAHEER JAMALI, J.
Learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that in so far as findings of fact in rent case are concerned, Rent Controller and the First Appellate Court in terms of section 21 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979 are the final authorities to record such findings, which are not open to question before the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction in terms of Article 199 of the Constitution, but, contrary to it, in the instant case, concurrent findings of the two Courts below have been up set by the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution, that too without any plausible and lawful justification for doing so. In order to fortify his submission as regards this legal position, he has placed reliance upon the case of Shakeel Ahmed v. Muhammad Tariq Farogh (2010 SCMR 1925).
2. To examine the above and other contentions raised in this petition, leave to appeal is granted. C.M.A. 330-K of 2011
3. Notice for a date to be fixed in the next Session. Till then, operation of the impugned judgment shall remain suspended. KMZ/M-7/SC Leave granted.