MUHAMMAD SUHAIL BUTT And Others vs ARIF MAHMOOD SHEIKH
This matter arises from an eviction application filed by the respondent landlord under the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959, wherein the Rent Controller ordered the deposit of arrears and future rent. The petitioners challenged this order by instituting a civil suit and seeking a temporary injunction. The trial court dismissed the injunction application, and subsequent appeals and revisions before the Additional District Judge and the High Court were likewise dismissed. The petitioners then sought special leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The Supreme Court heard the learned counsel and held that no prima facie case was made out to justify the issuance of a temporary injunction or the institution of a civil suit in cases of this nature. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition for lack of merit, affirming the lower forums' decisions.
- Can a tenant challenge an order passed by a Rent Controller under the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance by filing a separate civil suit?
- Whether a temporary injunction can be granted against an interlocutory rent deposit order passed in eviction proceedings?
- Does the institution of a civil suit lie to challenge rent restriction orders of a Rent Controller?
- Section 13(6), West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959
ORDER
KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN, J.--Arif Mahmood Sheikh landlord filed an application under the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance VI of 1959 for eviction of the petitioners from the property in dispute. In these proceedings the learned Rent Controller on 20-7-1980, passed an order under section 13(6) of the Ordinance for deposit of the arrears of rent and the future rent as mentioned therein. At that stage the present petitioners resorted to the institution of a civil suit for challenging the aforesaid order of the learned Re-t Controller. In that suit, they filed an application for issuance of a temporary injunction which was dismissed on 18-9-1980. Their first appeal and revision also met the same fate and were dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge and the High Court on 9-10-1980 and 25-10-1980 respectively.
2. The petitioners have come up in a petition for special leave to appeal against the same to this Court.
3. We have heard the learned counsel. He could not make out any prima facie case justifying issuance of a temporary injunction maintainability or the institution of a civil suit in cases of this nature
4. The result is that this petition has no merit and is dismissed hereby. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.