Find a Lawyer

FAZLI AHAD versus MST. HUSSAN ZARI

Failure to submit the rent by the tenants determined by section 17 (9), in accordance with the order of the controller of rent, it was necessary in nature to withhold the provisions of section 17 (9) of the Cantonment Rent Retention Act, 1963 and even a The day will be late By default, the tenant does not have the option to extend it at this time or did not follow the rent controller's instructions to the same tenant and failed to submit the rent within the stipulated time. Well, the rent controller had no choice but to. Seeking penalties under section 17 (9).

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2013

• Mst. SONIYA SHARIF v. BASHIR KUNDI 2013 MLD 1786
• SABIR v. State 2013 YLR 1787
• SHER KHAN v. State 2013 MLD 1793
• GHULAM BASIT v. State 2013 PCrLJ 1797
• SHAH JEHAN v. FEROZ SHAH 2013 CLD 1807
• Mst. ROZINA BEGUM v. Nawabzada MUHAMMAD FATEH KHAN 2013 CLC 1813
• ALLIED BANK LTD. v. SARDAR KHAN 2013 MLD 1814
• ABDUL HUSSAIN v. State 2013 MLD 1822

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2013 →

registration advocate from Tando Allahyar lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes