SUBHANULLAH Versus RAFIA AFZAL

ORDER

1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J. ‑‑This order will dispose of, the above mentioned four petitions.

2. The original records were summoned by this Court to examine the plea raised by the petitioners (tenants) that the landlord‑respondent had earlier filed an ejectment petition on the ground of re‑construction which was dismissed and the present ejectment petition, which was the second petition seeking their ejectment, was substantially on the same ground as the first one and was liable to dismissal in view of the bar contained in Section 23 of the Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963.

3. We have examined the plans filed alongwith the two ejectment petitions and find that there is a material difference between the two; hence we do not find any force in the plea raised by the petitioners that the second application being based substantially on the same ground which was raised in the first petition and found to be untenable and second petition is liable to dismissal in view of the bar contained in Section 23. However, we feel that the petitioners would need some time to shift to another premises.

4. Ch. Akhtar Ali, learned counsel for the respondent (landlord), who is present before us, has stated that the respondent is prepared to grant the tenants six months' time to enable them to make alternative arrangements. Accordingly the landlord will not be entitled to take out execution proceedings against the tenants until 10th of April, 1989.

5. These petitions, with the above direction, stand disposed of.

6. MA.K./S‑214/S Leave refused.