MASUD PERVAIZ BUTT versus SUB-REGISTRAR, GULBERG TOWN
Articles 35 (b) and (c) (First Schedule) Transfer of Property Act (IV 1882), Article 105 Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Constitution Petition Explains Modern Controversy for Landlord and Tenant Tenants and Premium Disinfection Returnable Security Deposit In this case, the landlord has to pay for certain occasions in the future, from time to time, or between the parties in connection with the ease of stamp duty on the security deposit returned by the tenant when rented. Was leased with a contract. Making a single payment at a fixed time and if such obligation is fulfilled by paying the entire rent in advance, such rent payment will be treated as rent and not otherwise because of such payment. The legal role was rent and just because it was paid in advance, the role would not change the premium, on the other hand there was a price that could be paid before the lease or it could be paid. The lease was considered for approval of the lease but the promise was to keep the exp for the money before the lease as used in the first Schedule to Stamp Act, 1899 of Articles 35 (b) and (c), It also meant that the landlord, in order to receive a one-time payment of the lease benefit, did not have to return the rental interest in the process between the landlord and the tenant and the amount of security deposit mentioned in it. Did not fall into the abridgment of Article 35 (c) (i) of the earlier Schedule. Stamp Act, 1899 The High Court set aside the order passed by the authorities because they were without legal authority and the circumstances allowed the petition
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2014
