1988 PLP 1343 (SCMR)
ABDUL RAZZAQ and another — Petitioners Versus SHUKRIA PARVEEN and 11 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1988 PLP 1343 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL RAZZAQ and another — Petitioners Versus SHUKRIA PARVEEN and 11 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 1343 (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 1988 PLP 1343 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 1343 (SCMR) (ABDUL RAZZAQ and another — Petitioners Versus SHUKRIA PARVEEN and 11 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- ---S.13--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3)--Order of eviction passed by Rent Controller was affirmed in appeal and constitutional petition having been dismissed, review application also failed- Statement made by petitioner's counsel that civil litigation about title in the suit property was pending and further that he would not press the petition for leave to appeal because petitioner had already been physically evicted--Petition dismissed with the observation that statement of counsel for petitioner was without prejudice to his client's right to pursue the other remedy now pending.
- Sh. Hamid Mukhtar, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 14th May, 1988.
- ‑‑‑S.13‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3)‑‑Order of eviction passed by Rent Controller was affirmed in appeal and constitutional petition having been dismissed, review application also failed‑ Statement made by petitioner's counsel that civil litigation about title in the suit property was pending and further that he would not press the petition for leave to appeal because petitioner had already been physically evicted‑‑Petition dismissed with the observation that statement of counsel for petitioner was without prejudice to his client's right to pursue the other remedy now pending.
- Sh. Hamid Mukhtar, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 25-11-1984 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in W.P.No.4228 of 1984).
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑This petition by the tenants' side is directed against orders of eviction passed by a learned Rent Controller, which were affirmed in appeal. The petitioners' Constitutional petition in the High Court having been dismissed and the review application also having failed, leave to appeal has now been sought. The learned counsel states that civil litigation about title in the suit property is pending and further that he does not press this petition because the petitioners have already been physically evicted. But this statement is without prejudice to his clients right to pursue the other remedy now pending. The petition is dismissed accordingly. M.B. A. /A‑233/S Petition dismissed.