NAIK ALAM vs DISTRICT JUDGE, FAISALABAD AND OTHERS
This matter came before the Supreme Court of Pakistan upon a petition for leave to appeal, arising from a conflict of judicial opinion within the Lahore High Court regarding the powers of a Rent Controller during execution proceedings. The core legal question concerns whether, under Section 17 (as amended) of the Rent Restriction Ordinance, a Rent Controller possesses the jurisdiction to entertain an objection petition during the execution of an eviction order, similar to the powers held by an ordinary executing court. The petitioner contended that the impugned judgment of the High Court, which denied such jurisdiction, conflicted with a prior decision of the same Court in Malik Muhammad Shafi v. Muhammad Saleem. Recognizing this conflict of views on a significant procedural question, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to settle the matter authoritatively. Pending the final adjudication of the appeal, the Court issued an interim order restraining the respondents from alienating the property in dispute.
- Does a Rent Controller have the jurisdiction to entertain an objection petition while executing an order of eviction under the Rent Restriction Ordinance?
- Is the jurisdiction of a Rent Controller in execution proceedings equivalent to that of an ordinary executing court?
- Section 17, Rent Restriction Ordinance
ORDER
1. ' NASIM IIAS-AN SHAH, J.-A learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court has, in this case, expressed the view that under section 17 (as amended) of the Rent Restriction Ordinance, the Rent Controller, while executing the order of eviction, does not have the jurisdiction to entertain an objection petition, which is possessed by the ordinary executing Court.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the view taken by the learned Judge in the High Court, in this case, is at variance with the view taken of the same question by another learned Judge of the same Court in the case of Malik Muhammad Shafi v. Muhammad Saleem (1).
(1) PLD 1982 Lab. 702 ' As a conflict of view exists on the same question in the High Court we would grant leave to appeal to settle it authoritatively.
3. ' Security Rs, 1,000.
4. ' The appeal shall be made ready on the present record, with liberty to the parties to add further documents, if any.
5. ' The respondents are restrained from alienating the property in dispute meanwhile.