Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition No. 76‑P of 1983, decided on 12th April, 1983.

(From the order dated 28‑3‑:983 of the Peshawar High Court passed in Writ Petition No. 226 of 1982).

---Art. 185(3) read with Art. 199‑Order of High Court declining to interfere with concurrent finding of fact of Revenue Authorities in writ jurisdiction‑Held, justified‑Leave to appeal refused.

Mian Younas Shah, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M. Qasim Imam, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 11th April, 1983.

The petitioners held lease of some land from respondents 5 and 6 by an agreement dated 8‑10‑1970.. The lease was for three years from Kharif 1971 to Rabi 1974. On the expiry of the lease, the said respondents brought a suit for recovery of arrears of lease money and for the ejectment of the petitioners, which was decreed in their favour by the Assistant Collector, Dargai, upon a finding that the petitioners were defaulters. The petitioners challenged the order of their ejectment up to the Board of Revenue but having failed throughout, invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of the Peshawar High Court. Their case was that as they had paid Rs. 3,000 to the respondents as security, they could not be held defaulters. The learned Judges, however, declined to interfere with the deci sion of the Revenue authorities on a question of fact regarding the default in. the payment of lease money.

2. There is nothing in the lease agreement to suggest that the advanced of Rs. 3,000 paid, was adjustable towards arrears of lease money. In the circumstance, the High Court was justified in not interfering with a concurrent finding of fact. We see no good ground to grant leave to appeal. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.

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.