1981 PLP 771 (CLC)
Appellant Versus BEGUM BILQEES NAZIR AHMED‑Respondent
| Citation | 1981 PLP 771 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Aftab Hussain, J |
| Parties | Appellant Versus BEGUM BILQEES NAZIR AHMED‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1981 PLP 771 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1981 PLP 771 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Aftab Hussain, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1981 PLP 771 (CLC) (Appellant Versus BEGUM BILQEES NAZIR AHMED‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Jariullah Khan for Appellant.
- Ehsanul Haq Chaudhry for Respondent.
- Date of hearing : 25th June, 1979.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)‑ ‑‑‑ S. 13(6) ‑ Defence, striking off ‑ Contention that tenants normally misconstrue direction for deposit of rent treating order for deposit by 15th‑Held, taking of such plea now too late in the day Such question resolved by judicial precedents about ten years ago Duty of counsel to inform client about provisions of S. 13(6)‑[Visumal Chatumal Khilnani v. Ali Bakhsh and others P L D 1978 Kar. 521 and Sarfraz Khan v. Muhammad Abdul Rauf P L D 1969 Kar. 176 held not applicable]‑[Counsel and client]. Visumal Chatumal Khilnani v. Ali Bakhsh and others P L D 1968 Kar. 521 and Sarfraz Khan v. Mohammad Abdul Rauf P L D 1969 Kar. 176 held not applicable. (b) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)‑ ‑‑ S. 13(6)‑Defence, striking off‑Appellant filing reply to application under S. 13(6) changing grounds before Rent Controller and District Judge‑‑Held, not possible to believe contention of appellant in circumstances of case. (c) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)‑‑ ‑‑ S. 15 (4). Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) and Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 5‑Second appeal‑Appeal filed without certified copy of order of Rent Controller‑‑‑Such copy not filed within period of limitation nor application under S. 5, Limitation Act filed‑Appeal, held, barred by time in circumstances of case.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑ S. 13(6) ‑ Defence, striking off ‑ Contention that tenants normally misconstrue direction for deposit of rent treating order for deposit by 15th‑Held, taking of such plea now too late in the day Such question resolved by judicial precedents about ten years ago Duty of counsel to inform client about provisions of S. 13(6)‑[Visumal Chatumal Khilnani v. Ali Bakhsh and others P L D 1978 Kar. 521 and Sarfraz Khan v. Muhammad Abdul Rauf P L D 1969 Kar. 176 held not applicable]‑[Counsel and client]. Visumal Chatumal Khilnani v. Ali Bakhsh and others P L D 1968 Kar. 521 and Sarfraz Khan v. Mohammad Abdul Rauf P L D 1969 Kar. 176 held not applicable. (b) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)‑ ‑‑ S. 13(6)‑Defence, striking off‑Appellant filing reply to application under S. 13(6) changing grounds before Rent Controller and District Judge‑‑Held, not possible to believe contention of appellant in circumstances of case. (c) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)‑‑ ‑‑ S. 15 (4). Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) and Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 5‑Second appeal‑Appeal filed without certified copy of order of Rent Controller‑‑‑Such copy not filed within period of limitation nor application under S. 5, Limitation Act filed‑Appeal, held, barred by time in circumstances of case. Jariullah Khan for Appellant. Ehsanul Haq Chaudhry for Respondent. Date of hearing : 25th June, 1979.