LT.Col. Ch. JAN MUHAMMAD vs LT. COL. M. A. SATTAR AND 8 OTHERS
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the Lahore High Court vacating an ad interim stay order granted in a second appeal concerning ejectment proceedings. The core legal question was whether the High Court was justified in vacating a conditional stay order when the petitioner failed to comply with the condition of depositing monthly rent. The Supreme Court held that the High Court's decision was unexceptionable, ruling that a conditional stay order granted as a concession can be properly withdrawn upon the non-fulfilment of the terms upon which it was issued. The key principle laid down is that a party who misuses or fails to comply with the conditions attached to a discretionary stay order cannot maintain the benefit of that order, and the court retains the power to vacate it upon default.
- Can a conditional stay order be vacated if the party fails to fulfill the terms on which it was granted?
- Whether the High Court is justified in withdrawing an ad interim stay when the petitioner defaults on depositing rent?
ORDER
1. ' NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.-The petitioner had filed a second appeal before the Lahore High Court against the order of his ejectment. While admitting the appeal, the High Court granted a stay ad interim on 27th January, 1970, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall continue to deposit the monthly rent which the Rent Controller, on the same terms as earlier ordered by the latter. This order was confirmed on 8th September, 1970. However, the petitioner did not deposit any rent and as such did not fulfil the condition on which the stay order was granted. An application was consequently made by the respondent for vacation of the stay order on the ground that the petitioner had not complied with the terms on which the stay was granted to him. Before the High Court, it was established that the petitioner had not deposited even a single penny after 27th January, 1970 despite the order of the Court. The High Court, therefore, held that the concession which was granted to the petitioner has been misused and declared that the stay order granted on 27th January, 1970 and confirmed on 8th September, 1970 was no longer in the field. The said orders were accordingly vacated on 27th November, 1974. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
2. It appears to us that no objection at all can be taken against the order of the High Court. The stay order was a conditional one and granted on terms and could be withdrawn on account of the non- fulfilment of the terms on which it was granted. We heartily agree with the High Court's order.
3. ' This petition is, therefore, dismissed hereby.
Cited by 2 cases
- Mrs. NAZIA SOHAIL vs Mst. IQBAL BEGUM and another 2016 PLJ Islamabad 239, 2016 MLD 1403
- S. B. INDUSTRIES PAK. LTD. vs SUI NOTHEREN GAS 1995 PLD Lahore 117