Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Writ Petition No. 4099 of 1986, decided on 19th November,1986
‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑Writ petition‑ ‑Laches‑‑Petitioner obtaining certified copy of impugned order on 29‑3‑1983 and filing writ petition on 8‑7‑1986, after a lapse of about 31 years‑‑No reasonable explanation given by petitioner for not invoking extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction of High Court within reasonable time‑‑Inordinate delay in approaching High Court against impugned order for no justifiable reason, held, warranted dismissal of petition on ground of laches.‑‑[Laches].
Mian Munawar Hussain for Petitioner.
Muhammad Ilyas Khan for contesting Respondent.
Abdul Majid, petitioner herein, who is in possession of the disputed shop comprising Property No. B.VI.S‑12/299, Gali Hakimanwdli, Sheikhupura as tenant under respondent No.3 at monthly rent of Rs.50, has assailed by means of this Constitutional petition order dated 21‑3‑1983 of the learned Additional District Judge, Sheikhupura whereby he dismissed petitioner's appeal against order dated 31‑7‑1982 of the learned Rent Controller, Sheikhupura directing his ejectment from the disputed shop.
2. Abdul Aziz respondent filed ejectment application under section 13 of the Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 seeking ejectment of the petitioner from the disputed shop on various grounds. During the pendency of the ejectment proceedings the parties on 9‑2‑1982 stated that they had appointed Haji Muhammad Ali as ' Salis' and his decision would be binding upon them. The dispute was referred to Haji Muhammad Ali who submitted his report on 20‑2‑1982 allowing period of five years for vacation of the disputed shop but directed that the petitioner shall go on paying regularly rent of the disputed shop at the rate of Rs.300 p.m. to Abdul Aziz. Learned Rent Controller acting upon the report of Haji Muhammad Ali directed the petitioner to vacate the disputed shop after lapse of five years from 20‑2‑1982 and to pay Rs.300 p.m. as rent to Abdul Aziz until vacation of the disputed shop. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the aforesaid order in appeal before the learned Additional District Judge, Sheikhupura. Hence this petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no doubt the petitioner and Abdul Aziz respondent had appointed Haji Muhammad Ali as their ' Salis to decide the dispute and that his decision would be binding on them but before he made his report on 20‑2‑1982 the petitioner moved an application on 18‑2‑1982 renouncing his appointment as ' Salis' as such the report made by him for vacation of the disputed shop was not binding on him. The Controller as well as learned Additional District Judge, Sheikhupura were wrong to hold that Haji Muhammad Ali was appointed as referee and directed petitioner's ejectment in accordance with his report. It was contended that Haji Muhammad Ali was appointed as arbitrator and even if it is assumed that he acted as referee the petitioner had revoked his authority a couple of days prior to his submission of the report.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the file. This petition can be disposed of without determining the question as to whether Haji Muhammad Ali was appointed as Arbitrator or referee and as to whether his authority had validly been revoked before he made his reports as on 21‑3‑1983 the learned Additional District judge dismissed petitioner's appeal and maintained order dated 31‑7‑1 18'2 of the learned Rent Controller, Sheikhupura directing his ejectment from the disputed shop. The petitioner had obtained certified copy of the aforesaid order on 27‑3‑1983 and filed this writ petition on 8‑7‑1986 i.e. after lapse of about 3 years without giving reasonable explanation for not invoking extraordinary Constitutional jurisdiction, of this Court within reasonable time, presumably because he had already been allowed a period of five years to remain in possession of the shop in dispute on the basis of report dated 20‑2‑1982 made by Haji Muhammad Ali in his favour.
The inordinate delay in approaching this Court against order passed on 21‑3‑1983 by the learned Additional District Judge, Sheikhupura for no justifiable reason warrants dismissal of this petition on the ground of laches alone. It is accordingly dismissed.
S.Q. Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer