Find a Lawyer

Second Appeal No. 325 of 1979, decided on 21st May 1980.

‑‑ S. 13 and Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. I, r. 10.‑Jurisdic tion‑Jurisdiction conferred on Rent Controller only when relation ship of landlord and tenant exists between parties‑Application of intervenor under r. 10 of O. 1, C. P. C. to be treated as party, held rightly rejected ‑ Intervenor having physical possession of demised property through respondent‑company/tenant, ejectment of respondent company automatically includes ejectment of intervenor.

S. 15 and Civil Procedure Code, (V of 1908), O. 1, r. 10‑Appeal Rent Controller a persona designata‑Civil Procedure Code not applicable to proceedings before him‑Appeal against order of Rent Controller rejecting intervenor's application under O. 1, r. 10 C. P. C. Not competent‑Question whether intervenor party or not‑A ques tion of fact and findings of two Courts below concurrent‑Interference in second appeal declined.‑[Question of fact‑Second appeal].

S. 3‑Contempt of Court‑Disregard of order of High Court staying delivery of possession to landlady‑Breach of prohibitory order issued by Court‑‑Not necessary to actually prove service of order upon party against whom issued‑Fundamental rule in proceedings of criminal and semi‑criminal nature‑Contemner to be shown to have had some definite and authentic information of nature of order alleged to have been violated by him‑Proof sufficient to fix a person with such knowledge, held, depends on facts and circumstances of each case Verbal assertion of a rival party not sufficient for purpose.

Syed Ahmad Shah v. State and another P L D 1967 S C 42 rel:

Zamirul Haq for Appellant.

A. G. Mangl and Hassan Akbar, Asstt. A.‑G. (Sind) for Respondents.

Dates of hearing : 9th, and 13th April 1980.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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