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

SAFDAR RASHID versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE


Article 185 (3) Ordinance for the Banning of Western Pakistan Citizens Rent (VI of 1959), Section 13 (3) (a), the personal requirement of evacuation Bona land was rejected in the Constitution, which was not yet eligible. Done. No grounds for goodwill intervention, refusal to appeal by Supreme Court
1985 S C M R 653

Present: Aslam Riaz Hussain and Muhammad Afzal Zullah, JJ

Sh. SAFDAR RASHID‑‑Petitioner

versus

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE and others‑‑Respondents

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 162 of 1982, decided on 24th April, 1982.

(Against the order of the Lahore High Court, dated 10‑2‑1982, passed in Writ Petition No. 12158 of 1980).

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959), S. 13(3)(a), Ejectment‑‑Bona fide personal need of landlady established‑‑Order impugned in Constitutional petition which, though not competent in circumstances, was dismissed on merits‑‑No ground having been made out for interference, leave to appeal refused by Supreme Court.

Sh. Hafiz, Advocate Supreme Court with S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 24th April, 1982.

ORDER

ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J

.‑‑ This petition by Sh. Safdar Rashid is directed against the order of the High Court, dated 10‑2‑1982, dismissing the petitioner's writ petition in a rent matter.

2. The facts giving rise to this petition briefly, are that Mst. Kalsoom Begum, respondent‑landlady filed an application for petitioner's ejectment on the ground of default in payment of rent and bona fide requirement of the house for personal use as a shop. The Rent Controller accepted the ejectment application on 24‑7‑1980 only on the ground of personal need The petitioner filed an appeal before the District Judge which was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Gujranwala vide order, dated 30‑11‑1980. Not being satisfied the petitioner filed a writ petition in the High Court, which too was dismissed, vide the impugned order.

The petitioner, has, now, come up to this Court for Leave to Appeal

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and find) that in the circumstances of this case the writ petition filed by him was not even competent. The High Court has, however, given well -reasoned judgment dismissing the same on merits. No ground has been made out for interference with the impugned order. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.

M. I. 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
divorce advocates from Parachinar 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.