Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

ABDUL HAMID versus FAZAL DIN


Article 3 58 () Application for Special Leave for Appeal Demands below the first record to deal with the requests required to inspect certain documents on the court record

1969 S C M R 88

Present : Hamoodur Rahman and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ

ABDUL HAMID AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners

versus

FAZAL DIN AND ANOTHER--Respondents

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 287 of 1968, decided on 22nd October 1968.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 15th April 1968, in S. A. O. No. 111 of 1968).

Constitution of Pakistan (1962)------

---

Art. 58 (3)‑Petition for Special Leave to Appeal‑Disposal of petition necessitating perusal of certain documents on record of Court below‑Records in first instance called for.

Sh. Hamid Mukhtar, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Masud Akhtar, Attorney for Petitioners.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 22nd October 1968.

ORDER

HAMOODUR RAHMAN, J.

‑This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment and order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court of West Pakistan in a Second Appeal from an order of a Rent Controller, granting permission to evict the petitioners herein.

The main ground on which the order for eviction appears to have been based is that the petitioners were in default, in the payment of rent from 8‑1‑1965 to 10‑5‑1965. The learned counsel however, contends that in coming to this conclusion the Courts below have failed to take into account material evidence which has been furnished in the shape of challans filed on the record of the Rent Controller to show deposit of rent in the State Bank of Pakistan for the relevant period.

These challans were not accepted in the case but it is con tended that since these were challans filed in Court to show payments in accordance with the directions of the Court, no further proof of them was necessary.

This contention necessitates a reference to the record of the Rent Controller which is not before us now. Let the said records be, therefore, called for in the first instance.

This petition is also out of time by one day, but an applica tion for condonation of the delay has been filed. It is, however, argued that if the date shown in the High Court stamp on the certified copy of the judgment is excluded from calculation, then the petition will be in time. We are not expressing any opinion on the question at this stage which will also be considered when this matter is put up for hearing again after the records have been received.

Order accordingly.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
top advocate from Bahawalpur lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.