1983 PLP 1088 (SCMR)
Haji ABDUL QADIR MOTIWALA-Petitioner Versus SAIFUDDIN AHMAD Respondent
| Citation | 1983 PLP 1088 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ |
| Parties | Haji ABDUL QADIR MOTIWALA-Petitioner Versus SAIFUDDIN AHMAD Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983 PLP 1088 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1983 PLP 1088 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1983 PLP 1088 (SCMR) (Haji ABDUL QADIR MOTIWALA-Petitioner Versus SAIFUDDIN AHMAD Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- U. Ghani Rashid, Advocate Supreme Court and A. A. Dastgir, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent. .
- Date of hearing: 15th August, 1983.
- U. Ghani Rashid, Advocate Supreme Court and A. A. Dastgir, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Sind High Court dated 24-4-1983 passed in F. R. A. 225/1982).
Art. 185(3)-West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959), S. 13(3)(a)(i)(c)-Ejectment for default in payment of rent and for personal need of landlord--Contention of petitioner (tenant) that landlord vacated ground floor of house in question after inducting petitioner as his tenant in respect of first floor of said house and that provisions of S 13(3)(a)(i)(c) of Ordinance were fully attracted in circumstances-Landlord admitting these facts in his statement--Leave to appeal granted to consider contention with liberty to parties to file additional document, if desired.
Judgment & Decree
MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHAN, J. Leave is sought to appeal against the judgment of the Sind High Court dated 24‑4‑1983 passed in the first Rent Appeal No. 225 of 1982 whereby the petitioner has been evicted from the first floor of house on Plot No. 8, Row No. 4, Sub‑Block C of Block I, Nazimabad, Karachi.
2. The petitioner was tenant of the aforesaid premises wherefrom his eviction was sought on the ground of default in the payment of monthly rent from September, 1975 onwards and also on the ground of personal need of the respondent. This petition was contested by the petitioner. The learned Rent Controller ordered the ejectment of the petitioner on the ground of personal requirement of the respondent herein. The first appeal was filed in the Sind High Court which was dismissed vide the impugned judgment dated 24‑4‑1983.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the respondent had vacated the ground floor of the house in question after inducting the petitioner as his tenant in respect of the first floor of the said house and that the A provisions of section 13 (3) (a) (i) (c) of the Urban Rent Restriction Ordi nance, 1959 were fully attracted to the facts of the present case. The relevant provision reads as follows "(c) be has not vacated such a building without sufficient cause after the commencement of this Ordinance in the said urban area." The learned counsel also referred to the statement of the respondent wherein he has admitted that he used to reside in the ground floor of the same premises and that the petitioner was also residing in the upper portion of the tenement when he vacated the ground floor. The points raised need considera tion. Leave is granted to consider the same. Security Rupees two thousand and five hundred only. To be heard on the present record with liberty to the parties to file additional documents, if desired. M. Z. M. Leave granted.