Find a Lawyer

AAMIR WAHEED versus MRS. HALEEMA AKHTAR

Sections 17 (4) and 24 Constitution of Pakistan, Article 23 Tenants Withdrawal Requests for the eviction of a tenant from a shop in the personal property question of the landlord were requested that the landlord cover his business for his son. Wanted, the prospective son was not employed at home and abroad on a profitable salary but the landlord was calling him back to start a business for him in the damaged stores to help him and Take care of her father Any improper restriction on a property is a violation of its fundamental rights. Article 23 of the Constitution guarantees that the provisions of section 17 (4) (b) (i) of the Cantonment Rent Restrictions Act, 1963 have been interpreted as if the landlord was a member of his family or Cannot file a eviction request to evict the tenant for joint use with the premises. The other person will be equal to the property rights negligence because the expatriate woman or the seriously ill person will be denied the benefits of Section 17. 4) (b) (i) The High Court of Cantonment Rent Restrictions Act, 1963 maintained that the order passed by the Rent Controller Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013

• Mst. FAKHARUNNISA v. HASSAN ALI 2013 YLR 603
• Ch. FAZAL MUHAMMAD v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Defence 2013 CLC 606
• NIB BANK LIMITED v. ALI HAMID TRAVELS 2013 CLD 613
• FAISAL NOOR v. REGISTRAR HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI 2013 PLC(CS) 614
• HAJI ABRO v. State 2013 MLD 627
• MUHAMMAD HANIF v. NIB BANK LIMITED 2013 CLD 627
• MUHAMMAD ALI v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Revenue Division 2013 PTD 628
• MUHAMMAD AMEEN v. GOVERNMENT OF SINDH through Home Secretary, Karachi 2013 YLR 632

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2013 →

when you need a advocate from Garh More lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes