PAKISTAN TELEVISION CORPORATION LTD. Versus BABAR ZAMAN
This matter originated as a petition for leave to appeal filed by a tenant against an eviction order issued under the Rent Restriction Law, which was upheld by the High Court in a constitutional petition. The core legal question concerned the validity of the eviction order based on the finding of a landlord-tenant relationship and default in rent payment. Upon review, the Supreme Court did not adjudicate the merits of the eviction order, as the parties reached a mutual settlement during the proceedings. The Court converted the petition into an appeal and disposed of the matter by a consent order. The holding established that where parties voluntarily agree to terms—specifically, the payment of a sum of Rs. 10,000 by the respondent to the petitioner in exchange for the petitioner vacating the premises within a stipulated timeframe—the Court may dispose of the litigation based on such consensus. This principle underscores the Court's authority to facilitate and enforce amicable settlements between parties to resolve pending disputes efficiently.
- Can a petition for leave to appeal be converted into an appeal to facilitate a consent order between parties?
- Does the Supreme Court have the authority to dispose of a rent eviction matter based on a mutual settlement between the landlord and tenant?
ORDER
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J. ‑‑This is a tenant's petition who has been ordered to be evicted under the Rent Restriction Law, inter alia on the ground of default in the payment of rent after a finding that relationship of landlord and tenant. His Constitutional Petition having dismissed by the High Court on 5‑12‑1983, he has now sought leave to appeal.
2. After some discussion with regard to the points raised before the High Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner agreed to accept the offer made from the learned counsel for the respondents viz. to receive Rs. 10,000 and to, vacate the premises. This is a fair arrangement between the parties. This petition, h which was liable to be dismissed on merits, is converted into appeal and disposed of by consent order; namely, that the petitioner shall vacate the premises in dispute on payment of Rs. 10,000 from respondent No. 2. She is allowed six months' time to make this payment. If, however, she makes the payment earlier, the premises shall be vacated by the petitioner on the day next after the payment. There shall be no order as to costs.
M.Y.H./D‑30/S Order accordingly.