CABAL BEGUM Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE

ORDER

MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑ Leave to appeal has been sought by a landlady; against the dismissal by the High Court, of her two Writ Petitions which had arisen out of and tenancy matter.

2. The petitioner filed two suits before the Ass1stant Collector 1st Grade, I one for recovery of rent from‑ the respondent (tenant amounting to more than Rs.30,000 and the other for ejectment. Respondents having failed with the lower Revenue Authorities, ultimately succeeded before the Board of Revenue in its revisional jurisdiction. The case regarding recovery of rent was remanded for working out exact amount of rent due from the respondents. Regarding ejectment it was held that in the circumstances of this case the respondents could not be treated as rent defaulter. The petitioner filed two separate writ petitions in the High Court which were dismissed. She has now sought leave to appeal.

3. Learned counsel has contended; firstly, that the Board of Revenue had no revisional jurisdiction, and secondly, that the two orders passed in the two revisions by the Board of Revenue are self‑contradictory. First question stands concluded against the petitioner by the judgment of this Court Lucas alias Luci and others v. S. M. Nasim, Member (Revenue), Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore and another P L D 1984 S C 227. Second question has been properly dealt with by the High Court. There being no infirmity, legal or otherwise, leave to appeal is refused.

M.A.K./I‑101/S Leave refused.