Lawyers Directory Listing
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.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 4‑D of 1970, decided on 15th June 1970.
(On appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court of East Pakistan, Dacca, dated the 21st October 1969, in Appeal from Appellate Decree No. 499 of 1968).
-----S. 106‑Notice‑ Ejectment‑N9tice for determination of tenancy sent by registered post, acknowledgement due, and duly served by postman‑Evidence of postman accepted by two lower appellate Courts and all Courts below finding tenant a defaulter‑Petition for leave to appeal dismissed‑Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58(3).
Mohammad A. Aziz, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing : 15th June 1970.
The petitioner was a monthly tenant under the respondent in respect of certain premises under the Double moorings Police Station in the district of Chittagong. The premises was governed by the Transfer of the Property Act and the Premises Rent Control Ordinance. The tenancy was determined by a notice under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act on the ground that the petitioner was a defaulter. After the determination of the tenancy by notice, the respondent brought a suit for ejectment of the petitioner. The points that arose for consideration in the suit were whether the tenancy was duly determined by notice and whether the petitioner was defaulter. The trial Court found the petitioner to be a defaulter, but held that no notice to quit was duly served on the petitioner. Accordingly, the trial Court granted a decree for arrear of rent, but refused the prayer for ejectment. On appeal, the first appellate Court held that the petitioner was a defaulter and that the tenancy was duly determined by a valid notice. Accordingly, a decree for ejectment was passed by that Court. On second appeal by the petitioner, a learned Single Judge of the High Court of East Pakistan agreed with the findings of the first appellate Court and, accordingly, affirmed the decree for ejectment. The petition for special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court.
The points agitated in the High Court have been raised in the petition. It appears that the notice for determination of the tenancy was sent by registered post with acknowledgement due and that it was duly served by the postal‑peon. The evidence of the postal‑peon in this regard was accepted by the High Court and the first appellate Court. All the‑ Courts below have found the petitioner to be a defaulter.
Thus, there is no merit in this petition. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer