1989 PLP 150 (SCMR)
DOST MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT JUDGE, SARGODHA and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 150 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Javid Iqbal, and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | DOST MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT JUDGE, SARGODHA and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 150 (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 1989 PLP 150 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Javid Iqbal, and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 150 (SCMR) (DOST MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT JUDGE, SARGODHA and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Allah Yar Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate-on-Record (died) with Mr S.M Tayyeb, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 9th May, 1988.
- Malik Allah Yar Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record (died) with Mr S.M Tayyeb, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the Judgment dated 5th December, 1983 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Writ Petition No. 5105 of 1981).
Ss..13 & 21--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)--Eviction of tenant ordered on ground of default in payment of rent after a finding that there existed relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties--Tenant agreed to accept offer made by landlord to receive a sum of rupees ten thousand and vacate premises--Arrangement made by parties appearing to be fair--Petition which was liable to be dismissed on merits, converted into appeal and disposed of by consent order in terms of agreement between parties by the Supreme Court.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑Ss..13 & 21‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑Eviction of tenant ordered on ground of default in payment of rent after a finding that there existed relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties‑‑Tenant agreed to accept offer made by landlord to receive a sum of rupees ten thousand and vacate premises‑‑Arrangement made by parties appearing to be fair‑‑Petition which was liable to be dismissed on merits, converted into appeal and disposed of by consent order in terms of agreement between parties by the Supreme Court. Malik Allah Yar Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record (died) with Mr S.M Tayyeb, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents. Date of hearing: 9th May, 1988. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑This is a tenant's petition who has been ordered to be evicted under the Rent Restriction Law, inter alia on the ground of default in the payment of rent after a finding that relationship of landlord and tenant. His Constitutional Petition having dismissed by the High Court on 5‑12‑1983, he has now sought leave to appeal.
2. After some discussion with regard to the points raised before the High Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner agreed to accept the offer made from the learned counsel for the respondents viz. to receive Rs. 10,000 and to, vacate the premises. This is a fair arrangement between the parties. This petition, h which was liable to be dismissed on merits, is converted into appeal and disposed of by consent order; namely, that the petitioner shall vacate the premises in dispute on payment of Rs. 10,000 from respondent No.
2. She is allowed six months' time to make this payment. If, however, she makes the payment earlier, the premises shall be vacated by the petitioner on the day next after the payment. There shall be no order as to costs. M.Y.H./D‑30/S Order accordingly.