Find a Lawyer

KHALID YAQOOB versus MST. NASREEN AFTAB

Section 17 (4) (b) (i) (6) The tenant's contention that the tenant's request for removal of the marital property required that the landlord use the premises by requesting the eviction of his son Wanted to be evicted based on personal need. The leaseholder's property was accepted by the tenant; the terms and conditions of the lease deed were present between the parties. The landlord may apply while on vacation. The tenant intended to turn the premises into a restaurant and his son would take care of the business on behalf of the tenant, not to remove the ject for his personal use and not to any family member. The landlord required the landlord for his own use. The tenants' rights are protected under Section 17 (6) of the Rent Restriction Act, 1963, whatever they want to use. If the landlord does not occupy it within one month of the date of the landlord's order, the order directing him to occupy the premises may be reinstated if the landlord has to caution The law provided a sufficient amount of protection against the intention to take possession of the houses. Identified an unconstitutional order that was approved in accordance with the law

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2014

• MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH v. MUHAMMAD ASLAM 2014 CLC 1205
• Mst. IQBAL BIBI v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE 2014 MLD 1206
• Syed AMJAD ALI SHAH v. MANAGING DIRECTOR, PTV CORPORATION 2014 PLC(CS) 1207
• Mst. WAQAR-UN-NISA v. State 2014 PCrLJ 1211
• Sheikh ATTIQ-UR-REHMAN v. Syed ALI MURTAZA 2014 YLR 1215
• STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN v. Mst. Begum RASHEEDA JAMIL 2014 CLD 1216
• SHAFQAT MEHMOOD v. MUHAMMAD NAZIR 2014 CLC 1222
• MUHAMMAD NAWAZ KHAN v. PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Collector 2014 YLR 1222

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2014 →

immigration advocates contact from Gujrat lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes