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. 264 of 1972, decided on 7th October 1975.
(In the matter of vacation of stay order).
‑‑ S. 13‑Ejectment stayed subject to deposit of up‑to‑date rent by tenant‑No rent deposited and notice to show cause issued Advocate appearing on tenant's behalf at first stating that he had no instructions but later asking for time to ascertain correct position‑Counsel, held, had plenty of time to obtain instructions from petitioner (tenant) and non‑compliance of Court's order stood unchallenged‑Stay order vacated.
Ch. Muhammad Anwar Butter, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Iqbal Ahmad Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondent No. 1.
Date of hearing 7th October 1974.
‑By an order dated the 16th of November, 1972, this Court granted .leave to appeal in Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 264 of 1972, and also passed a stay order in favour of the petitioner subject to deposit by him of upto date rent with the Rents Controller.
The present application is by respondent Ghulam Sabir, the transferee of the property in dispute. He has complained that the petitioner has failed to comply with the directions of the Court regarding deposit of up‑to‑date rent, and the aforesaid order should, therefore, be rescinded. On the 11th of June, 1974, a notice of this application was directed to be issued to the petitioner.
Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate on Record, has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. At first he said that he had no instructions in the matter. Later, however, he a4'k d for time to ascertain the correct position.
As noticed already a notice was directed to be issued to him in June 1974, and he had, therefore, plenty of time to obtain instructions from the petitioner. The respondent's statement about, non‑compliance with this Court's order remains unchallenged.
We have no other alternative but to accept the respondent's application and vacate the order of stay passed by this Court on the 16th of November, 1972.
The application is accordingly allowed but without any order as to costs.
Petition allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer