1991 PLP 1917 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD SHARIF — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1917 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah and Ghulam Mujaddid, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SHARIF — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 1917 (SCMR)?
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 1991 PLP 1917 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah and Ghulam Mujaddid, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 1917 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD SHARIF — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Inayatullah Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate-on-Record and Sardar Muhammad Tufail Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 31st October, 1989.
- Ch. Inayatullah Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate‑on‑Record and Sardar Muhammad Tufail Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of the Lahore High Court. dated 3-9-1989, in W.P. 7 No.4693 of 1989).
Ss. 13(3) & 14
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
Second ejectment application, maintainability of
First ejectment application was filed on ground of personal use of landlord while second application filed after seventeen years was for landlord's own as well as for his son's requirement-- Held, no time limit, could be fixed for changed circumstances for personal requirement, but all that was required would be that Court must make sure that requirement of landlord was genuine
Where Court had assured itself about genuineness of request by landlord, leave to appeal against orders of Courts below was refused
Contention that, second application was not maintainable was repelled.
Judgment & Decree
GHULAM MUJADDID, J.‑‑‑On 4‑5‑1989, Rent Controller, Lahore, ordered ejectment of Muhammad Sharif petitioner from shop in property No.C/1045, Chata Bazar, Lahore. He appealed to the District Judge. On 5‑6‑1989, the Additional District Judge dismissed the same. Muhammad Sharif invoked the Constitution jurisdiction of the Lahore High Court. The Constitution petition met the same fate. Now he seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 3‑9‑1989. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner repeated the sane contentions which had been raised before the High Court and were repelled. His main emphasis was that the second application was not maintainable. The landlord failed to prove that his requirement was genuine. These submissions have no force. The second application for ejectment was repeated after the lapse of seventeen years. In the first application the landlord wanted the property for his personal use. The second application was for his own as well as for his son's requirement. No time limit can be fixed for changed circumstances and accordingly for personal requirement. All that is required is that the Court must make sure that the requirement was genuine. This has been done. The petition is without any merit. Dismissed. H.B.T./M‑1200/S Petition dismissed.