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

AFZAL ALI versus ASHRAF ALI


Article 185 (3) of the West Pakistan Citizens Rental Ordinance (VI of 1959), Section 13, for personal use, the tenant is excluded where it has not been exempted in any way. This section 13 (4), the landlord's ordinance on the violation of the West Pakistan Citizens Rent, three months after the tenants were evicted in 1959, shows that the landlord fulfilled the need for personal use. It was not appropriate to do so, if the applicant is advised, he can treat himself under the relevant law, the application was dismissed, nothing else.

1983 S C M R 1271

Present : Nasim Hasan Shah and M. S. H. Quraishi, JJ

Malik AFZAL ALI‑Petitioner

Versus

Malik ASHRAF ALI‑Respondent

Civil Petition No. 936 of 1931, decided on 9th May. 1983.

(From the order, dated 28th June, 1981 of the Lahore High Court passed in Writ Petition No. 3285 of 1981).

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑

‑‑ Art. 185(3)‑West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959), S. 13‑‑Ejectment on ground of personal use‑Tenant ejected there being no stay granted to him‑Contention that landlord. in violation of S.13(4), West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 sold shop after three months of ejectment of tenant showed that landlord's requirement for personal use was not bona fide‑Held, petitioner, if so advised, may take his remedy under relevant law‑No other point having been urged, petition dismissed.

Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtaq, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 9th May, 1983.

ORDER

M. S. H. QURAISHI, J.‑

The respondent, who is real brother of the petitioner, instituted proceeding for ejectment of the petitioner on the ground of personal use. The petition was dismissed by the Rent Controller but it succeeded in appeal before the Additional District Judge, and his ejectment was ordered. Against this he filed a writ petition but the same was dismissed in limine by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court on 28‑6‑1981 which is now impugned in the present petition for leave to appeal.

2. It is conceded that no stay having been granted, the petitioner was ejected from the shop on 17‑1‑1982. That being so, the petition has become infructuous. Learned counsel, however, submits that the respon dent has in violation of section 13(4) of the Rent Restriction Ordinance sold the shop to a third party on 29‑4‑1982 which, according to learned counsel, showed that his requirement for personal use was not bona fide. This is a matter for which the petitioner, if so advised, may take his remedy under the law.

3. ‑ No other point having been argued, the petition is dismissed:

M. Z. M,

Petition dismissed,

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
property advocate from Lakimarwat 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.