P L D 1979 Lahore 469 (PLP)
MRs. FEROZA ASLAM-Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD AKHTAR AND ANOTHER-Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1979 Lahore 469 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | S. 2-Intra-Court Appeal-Rent Controller setting aside ex parte order of ejectment and finding necessary to associate tenant in proceedings in circumstances of case-Conclusion of Rent Controller as well as circumstances leading to such conclusion being open to review on grounds of fact and law when appeal preferred against final order interference at intermediary stage of proceedings declined and adjudication on merits rather than on technicalities preferred, -Intra-Court appeal. |
| Bench Members | Shafl-ur-Rehman and M. S. H. Qureshi, JJ |
| Parties | MRs. FEROZA ASLAM-Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD AKHTAR AND ANOTHER-Respondents |
| Primary Law | Law Reforms (Amendment) Act (VI of 1975) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1979 Lahore 469 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Law Reforms (Amendment) Act (VI of 1975) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1979 Lahore 469 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the S. 2-Intra-Court Appeal-Rent Controller setting aside ex parte order of ejectment and finding necessary to associate tenant in proceedings in circumstances of case-Conclusion of Rent Controller as well as circumstances leading to such conclusion being open to review on grounds of fact and law when appeal preferred against final order interference at intermediary stage of proceedings declined and adjudication on merits rather than on technicalities preferred, -Intra-Court appeal. bench comprising: Shafl-ur-Rehman and M. S. H. Qureshi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1979 Lahore 469 (PLP) (MRs. FEROZA ASLAM-Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD AKHTAR AND ANOTHER-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Qamatuddin Ahmad for Appellant.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 2-Intra-Court Appeal-Rent Controller setting aside ex parte order of ejectment and finding necessary to associate tenant in proceedings in circumstances of case-Conclusion of Rent Controller as well as circumstances leading to such conclusion being open to review on grounds of fact and law when appeal preferred against final order interference at intermediary stage of proceedings declined and adjudication on merits rather than on technicalities preferred, -[Intra-Court appeal].
Judgment & Decree
SHAFI-UR-REHMAN, J.-This app.-al under section 3 of the Law Reforms Ordinance calls in question an order in limine dismissing appellant's constitutional petition on 23-2-1977.
2. The appellant is the landlady who procured an order of ejectment against her tenant ex parte on the ground that she required the premises for her personal occupation. Later the Rent Controller set aside the ex parte proceedings on the ground that a reasonable opportunity of hearing was more appropriate to the proceedings against the tenant.
3. The learned Judge in Chambers has held that the order complained of was not final, and that against the final order if and when passed the appellant had statutory remedy adequate in all respects and even the impugned order could then be reviewed.
4. The appellant's case is that the Rent Controller's order, dated 16-7-1976 was never attacked and remained intact, that service had been taken to have been properly effected on him, that even possession had beets obtained in ex parse execution .proceedings and in these circumstance there was no question of a jurisdiction available to the Rent Controller to be exercised.
5. We are not impressed by these submissions. The learned Rent Controller had come to the conclusion that in the circumstances of the case, it was necessary to associate the respondent-tenant, in the proceedings. This conclusion of the Rent Controller as well as the circumstances in which it was reached will be open to review on grounds of fact and law, if and when appeal against the final order is preferred. We would not, like the learned Judge in Chambers, endorse interference at this intermediary stage of the proceedings and would rather prefer an adjudication on merit than on technicalities which too in their own domain, and at proper time are reviewable. The appeal is therefore dismissed in limine. s. A. H. Appeal dismissed.