1989SCMR74 (PLP)
GHULAM MUHAMMAD and others — Petitioners Versus AMIR NAWAB KHAN and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1989SCMR74 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Ghulam Mujaddid JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM MUHAMMAD and others — Petitioners Versus AMIR NAWAB KHAN and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989SCMR74 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989SCMR74 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Ghulam Mujaddid JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989SCMR74 (PLP) (GHULAM MUHAMMAD and others — Petitioners Versus AMIR NAWAB KHAN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Tariq Jamal Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 15th October, 1988.
- Tariq Jamal Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of Peshawar High Court dated 11-7-1988 in W.P. No. 204 of 1988).
Ss. 13 & 15--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)--Appeal against ex parte order filed before District Judge was time-barred and delay had not been properly explained--Appeal dismissed and order was upheld by High Court- Supreme Court declined to interference.
Judgment & Decree
GHULAM MUJADDID, J. ‑‑The petitioners seek leave to appeal against the judgment of Peshawar High Court dated 11‑7‑1988 whereby their Constitutional petition was dismissed in limine and the order passed by the District Judge, Malakand, dated 28‑2‑1988, was upheld. Rent Controller, Malakand at Batkhela by order dated 16‑2‑1987 ordered ejectment of the petitioners. This was an ex parte order. Petitioners went in appeal before the District Judge who thoroughly examined the entire matter and ultimately came to the conclusion that there was no justification to set aside the ex parte order especially when the appeal before him was also barred by time and the delay had not been properly explained. This order was upheld by the Peshawar High Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners was unable to advance any effective argument to justify interference in the impugned judgment of Peshawar High Court. It is not a fit case for leave. M.A.K./G‑147/S Petition dismissed.