Find a Lawyer

Writ Petitions Nos.71, 72 and 73-R of 1987, decided on 23rd February, 1987.

--Art.199--Landlord and tenant--Status quo granted by Supreme Court--Enforcement of--Invocation of constitutional jurisdiction--Status quo of Supreme Court was to the effect that each party in possession of respective area of disputed land either directly or through tenants would remain in possession till final decision of case--After issuance of status quo and during pendency of case before Supreme Court, one of landlords, a respondent got final ejectment order from competent authority against petitioners who were tenants of disputed land- Petitioners through constitutional petition before High Court submitted that as long as status quo issued by Supreme Court in favour of their landlord respondent was in operation, they could not be disturbed in their possession--Since possession of parties directly or through tenants was protected by order of Supreme Court, petitioner, held, could not be ejected in pursuance of ejectment order obtained by a party against tenants as long as holder of stay order held petitioners as his tenants--High Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction directed that interim order of Supreme Court should be complied with both in letter and spirit.

Muhammad Naazar Khan for Petitioners.

This order will dispose of Writ Petition Nos.71, 72 and 73-R/87 as these arise in similar circumstances.

2. There was a dispute of title to the land between Muhammad Jamil Khan, respondent No.4 and Muhammad Jamil Asghar, respondent No.5. Having lost in the Constitutional jurisdiction in the High Court, Muhammad Jamil Asghar, respondent No.5 has filed C.P.S.L.A. No.1057-85 in the Supreme Court and an order has been passed by the learned Judge of the Supreme Court on 26-1-1986 to the following effect.

"Heard. Each party shall remain in possession of the area which is in its possession at present, either directly or through tenants. It is clarified at the request of respondent's counsel that this order shall not affect the proceedings regarding ejectment of the tenants."

The petitioners are the tenants. Applications for their ejectment were filed by Muhammad Jamil Khan respondent No.4 which were allowed on 1-2-1986. Their appeals were dismissed on 28-7-1986 and their revision petitions were dismissed by the Additional Commissioner (Revenue), vide order, dated 29-12-1986. They have filed the afore -titled Constitutional petitions.

2. After some arguments the learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that he would not like to press the petitions for the present and would only submit that as long as the afore-quoted order of the learned Supreme Court of Pakistan in favour of Muhammad Jamil Asghar, respondent No.5 is in operation, the petitioners who are his tenants and have been paying rent to .him be not disturbed in their possession.

3. Khan Muhammad Younas Khan, Advocate says that he has a watching brief on behalf of Muhammad Jamil Khan, respondent No.4 and would submit that the proper thing for the petitioner is to apply to the learned Supreme Court for clarification of the said order.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners in reply submitted that the petitioners are not parties in the petition filed by Muhammad Jamil Asghar, respondent No.5, in the Supreme Court and that they being poor people need not be made to suffer agony of litigation and expense when their possession as tenants of Muhammad Jamil Asghar, respondent No.5, has already been protected by the aforequoted order of the learned Supreme Court.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it would appear quite clear that the learned Supreme Court had directed on the petition of Muhammad Jamil Asghar, respondent No.5 as against Muhammad Jamil Khan, respondent No.4, that "each party shall remain in possession of the area which is in its possession at present, either directly or through tenants." If Muhammad Jamil Asghar, respondent No. 5 holds the petitioners to be his tenants, then Muhammad Jamil Asghar's possession through the tenants, the petitioners, shall remain protected. The last sentence in the order of the, learned Judge of the Supreme Court i.e. "It is clarified at the request of respondent's counsel (Muhammad Jamil Khan) that this order shall not affect the proceedings regarding ejectment of the tenants", means that ejectment proceedings filed by Muhammad Jamil Khan, respondent No.4, shall not be affected i.e. these may continue and be concluded It is exactly what has happened. Since the possession of Muhammad Jamil Asghar, directly or through tenants is protected, the petitioners shall not be ejected in pursuance of the orders of ejectment against them as long as Muhammad Jamil Asghar respondent No.5 holds them as his tenants of the land in dispute. The petition before the learned Supreme Court of Pakistan is yet to come up for consideration. Therefore, till then the interim order of the learned Supreme Court quoted above shall be complied with both in letter and spirit.

6. Subject to the above, these petitions are disposed of.

H.B.T./M-167/L Order accordingly.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.