Sh. ASGHAR ALI vs DISTRICT JUDGE, SAHIWAL and others
This matter originated as an ejectment application filed by the respondent against the petitioner regarding a shop, based on grounds of default and personal need. The Rent Controller struck off the petitioner's defence under Section 13(6) of the Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance due to the petitioner's failure to deposit rent arrears for May and June 1983. This order was upheld by the District Judge in appeal, and subsequently, the Lahore High Court dismissed the petitioner's constitutional petition challenging these orders. The petitioner sought leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The Supreme Court observed that the petitioner merely reiterated contentions already repelled by the High Court and failed to raise any new grounds. Finding that no substantial question of law of public importance was involved in the petition, the Court refused to grant leave to appeal. The judgment affirms the finality of the concurrent findings of the lower courts in the absence of any significant legal question requiring Supreme Court intervention.
- Does the failure to deposit rent arrears as ordered by a Rent Controller justify the striking off of a tenant's defence?
- Is a petition for leave to appeal maintainable when it merely reiterates contentions already rejected by the High Court?
- What constitutes a substantial question of law of public importance sufficient to grant leave to appeal in a rent matter?
- Section 13(6), Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance
1. ' GHULAM MUJADDID, J.--Muhammad Tariq respondent filed an application for ejectment of Sh.
2. Asghar Ali, petitioner, from shop No, 355/4. The grounds were default and personal need. The Rent Controller by order dated 10-4-1984 struck off the defence under section 13(6) of the Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance because the petitioner had failed to deposit the arrears of rent for the months of May and June, 1983, at the rate of Rs,600. Order of the Rent Controller was challenged before the District Judge, Sahiwal in appeal. The District Judge, by judgment dated 7-3-1985 confirmed the order of the Rent Controller.
3. ' Sh. Asghar Ali thereafter invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of the Lahore High Court.
4. The Constitution petition was dismissed on 1-11-1988. The petitioner now seeks leave to appeal against the aforesaid order of the High Court.
5. ' Learned counsel appearing in support of this petition reiterated the same contentions which were raised before the High Court and were repelled. No new ground was urged before us.
6. ' There is no substantial question of law of public importance involved in this petition. Leave is accordingly refused.
7. ' Leave to . 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.