Mst. AZMAT SULTANA vs Mst. FAKHAR JAHAN BEGUM AND 2 Other
This petition for leave to appeal was directed against an order of the Lahore High Court, which had dismissed the petitioner's constitutional petition in limine. The underlying dispute arose from an ejectment application filed by the respondent-landlady against the petitioner-tenant under the Rent Restriction Ordinance, alleging personal need for the premises, default in rent payment, and property damage. While the Rent Controller initially dismissed the application, the Additional District Judge, Multan, reversed this decision on appeal and ordered the petitioner's eviction. The petitioner challenged this appellate order before the High Court under its constitutional jurisdiction, which was subsequently dismissed. Upon review, the Supreme Court found no irregularity in the High Court's order, concluding that the appellate judgment was neither passed without lawful authority nor contrary to law. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming the eviction order, while granting the petitioner a three-month grace period to vacate the premises, conditional upon the continued payment of rent and a voluntary undertaking to surrender possession upon the expiry of that period.
- Can a High Court dismiss a constitutional petition in limine if the impugned appellate order is found to be lawful?
- Does the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact regarding ejectment under the Rent Restriction Ordinance?
- Can the Supreme Court grant a grace period for vacating premises upon the dismissal of a leave to appeal petition?
- Section 13, Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959
ORDER
1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.- This petition is directed against the order dated 17-12-1980 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No. 11999 of 1980.
2. The petitioner is a tenant in a house situate in Multan City. Respondent No. 1, who is the owner of the said house, filed an application under section 13 of the Rent Restriction Ordinance for her ejectment on the ground that she needed the premises for personal occupation and that the petitioner had com--mitted default in payment of rent and had also damaged the property. The Rent Controller dismissed application vide order dated 24-11-1979. The respondent No. 1preferred an appeal against the said order which was accepted by the learned Additional District Judge, Multan vide his order dated 25-11-1980, who reversed the findings of the Rent Controller and ordered the eviction of the petitioner.
3. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the petitioner moved the Lahore High Court in its constitutional jurisdiction but the learned Judge in the High Court, after considering the matter at considerable length, dismissed the said petition by his order dated 17-12-1980 in limine.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and find no irregularity in the order of the High Court holding that the judgment of the Additional District Judge, Multan could not be held to have been passed without lawful authority or was contrary to law.
5. There is, therefore, no force in this petition which is dismissed hereby The petitioner, however, is granted three months' time to vacate the premises, subject to payment of the monthly rent in accordance with .Law and on her undertaking that she will voluntarily surrender the house on the expiry of the aforesaid period.