AMIR HAIDER Versus SHABBIR AHMAD

The facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition seeking revision of the order of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Bhakkar, dated the 16th January, 1983, rejecting the petitioner's application for issuance of temporary injunction pendente lite restraining respondent 1 from getting the petitioner ejected from the house in dispute, situate in Bhakkar Dagar Gharbi, and of the learned District Judge, Bhakkar, dated the 10th May; 1983, affirming in appeal the decision of the learned trial Court are these. Shabbir Ahmad, respondent 1, filed before the Rent Controller, Bhakkar, application under section 13 of the . Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, for securing eviction of Peer Khan, respondent 2, from the property in dispute. Professing himself to be an owner of the property, Amir Haider, petitioner, got himself impleaded as a party to the ejectment application. The learned Rent Controller, Bhakkar, passed the ejectment order against the petitioner and respondent 2. The petitioner's appeal against the order of the learned Rent Controller was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Bhakkar. The petitioner's writ petition impugning the legality of the orders of the learned Rent Controller and the learned District Judge was dismissed by this Court which observed that the petitioner's remedy for seeking title to the property lay before the Civil Court. The petitioner instituted suit in the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Bhakkar, for a declaration that he was the owner of the property in question and for issuance of perpetual injunction restraining respondent No. 1 from getting him ejected from the house on the basis of the orders of the learned Rent Controller and the learned Additional District Judge. Alongwith the plaint he presented application for grant of temporary injunction order which was rejected by the learned trial Court. His appeal having failed before the learned District Judge he has invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the registered sale‑deed by means whereof the petitioner is stated to have purchased the property in dispute as well as upon the mutation sanctioned in consequence thereof. Prima facie the petitioner can be said to have a case for securing temporary injunction order in his favour. He would certainly suffer irreparable A loss if he was thrown. out of the house. The balance of convenience is in his favour. In these circumstances the temporary injunction order ought to have been issued. This petition is accepted and respondent 1 is restrained till the decision of the suit from getting the petitioner evicted from the house in question.

3. In view of the past protracted litigation between the parties it is desirable that the suit filed by the petitioner should be most expeditiously disposed of by the learned trial Court. Accordingly the learned Senior Civil Judge, Bhakkar, is directed to decide the petitioner's suit within two months by giving it priority over other cases and report compliance to this Court. The parties have been directed to appear before the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Bhakkar, on the 6th December, 1983. The parties are left to bear their own costs of this petition.

M.Y.H./3034/L

Revision accepted.