1989 PLP 1767 (SCMR)
Haji MUHAMMAD SADIQ Petitioner Versus IFTIKHAR SAEED and 2 others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1767 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | Haji MUHAMMAD SADIQ Petitioner Versus IFTIKHAR SAEED and 2 others‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1767 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 1767 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1767 (SCMR) (Haji MUHAMMAD SADIQ Petitioner Versus IFTIKHAR SAEED and 2 others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Bashir Ahmed Ansari, Advocate Supreme Court and Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 22nd May, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 21‑2‑1988 of the Lahore High Court Rawalpindi Bench, in Writ Petition No.57 of 1988). West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (N'1 of 1959) ‑‑‑S.13‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑Bona fide requirement of landlord‑‑Tenant had throughout lost on the issue relating to the bona fide requirement of landlord‑‑All Courts had concurrently rendered findings on fact which were against the tenant‑‑Tenant had raised points relating to appreciation of evidence/material before the Rent Controller on which findings of Courts below did not suffer from any infirmity of law or principle‑‑Petition for leave to appeal by tenant dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑This petition for leave to appeal by a tenant under Rent Restriction Law (in ejectment matter) is directed; against the dismissal of his writ petition by the High Court. He has throughout lost on the issue relating to the bona fide requirement of respondent/landlord. All the Courts have concurrently rendered findings of fact which go against the petitioner. Learned counsel has raised points relating to the appreciation of the evidence/material before the Rent Controller. In this behalf the impugned judgment does not suffer from any infirmity of law or principle. This petition has no force and is, accordingly, dismissed. M.B.A./M‑918/S Petition dismissed