MUHAMMAD NASRULLAH vs AZIZUL QADIR And Other
This petition for leave to appeal was filed against a judgment of the High Court dismissing a writ petition in a rent dispute. During the proceedings, the petitioner's counsel chose not to press the petition on its merits and instead requested additional time to vacate the residential premises. The respondent-landlord consented to granting a four-month grace period, subject to the conditions that the petitioner delivers vacant possession of the house by the specified date and pays the monthly rent in advance for this extended period. The Supreme Court of Pakistan accepted this mutual agreement, granting the petitioner four months to vacate the premises under the agreed-upon terms, and consequently dismissed the petition with no order as to costs.
- Whether the Supreme Court can grant an extension of time to a tenant to vacate premises based on a mutual agreement between the parties?
- Can a petition for leave to appeal be dismissed as not pressed on merits if the tenant only seeks time to vacate the premises?
ORDER
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.--The petitioner has filed the present petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court dated 25-9-1984, dismissing his writ petition in a rent case.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the petition on merits but only seeks some time to vacate the house in question. The learned counsel for the respondents-landlord is present and agrees to give him four months' time to vacate the house on the condition that shall give vacant possession thereof to the landlord on 1-9-1985 and that he shall pay rent for this period to the respondents each month in advance, to which the learned counsel for the petitioner agrees.
3. In this view of the matter, we grant four months time to the petitioner to vacate the premises in question, on the aforementioned conditions. The petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.