Find a Lawyer

QAISER JAVED MALIK versus PERVAIZ HAMEED

Under the provisions of Section 17 of the Islamabad Rent Restriction Ordinance 2001, the withdrawal petition against the premises relating to the period and the personal requirement of the landlord in the lease agreement was signed that section The provisions of 17 will continue. Such words shall not affect the rights of the parties under section 6 of the Ordinance, but rather, subject to the provisions of section 17 after the expiry of the term 17. In the event of a lease agreement, the tenant will lose the right to occupy or occupy the home, in which case the eviction of the tenant on the basis of section 17 of the ordinance will be ineffective, in principle Was accepted.

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2009

• SAEED AKHTAR v. State 2009 SCMR 834
• AXLE PRODUCTS LIMITED v. ALLIED BANK OF PAKISTAN LTD. 2009 CLD 836
• PARKS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD. through Managing Director v. PRIVATIZATION COMMISSIONER, through Secretary 2009 SCMR 838
• Mian MUHAMMD AMAR YOUSAF v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Housing and Works, Islamabad 2009 SCMR 843
• MUBARAK ALI v. FIRST PRUDENTIAL MODARABA 2009 CLD 849
• Ms. CLARE BENEDICTA CONVILLE v. Mst. SABAHAT IDREES 2009 SCMR 851
• MAHMOOD HUSSAIN LARIK v. MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED 2009 SCMR 857
• GHULAM ABBAS NIAZI v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2009 PLD 866

All Supreme Court judgments of 2009 →

power of attorney advocate Jehanian lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes