ALEEMUDDIN and another vs MUHAMMAD ASLAM and others
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed the petitioners' constitutional petition regarding an ejectment order. The dispute arose when the respondent, who had been transferred the plot in question by Settlement Authorities, filed an ejectment application against the petitioners. The petitioners, who were in possession of the plot, contested the application by denying the landlord-tenant relationship, asserting they had executed an agreement of sale with the previous occupant and had paid the full amount before the plot was surrendered. Relying on Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act 1882, the petitioners argued that their possession was protected against dispossession. While the Rent Controller initially dismissed the ejectment application, the Additional District Judge reversed this decision, ordering the petitioners to vacate. The High Court subsequently dismissed the petitioners' constitutional challenge. The Supreme Court, finding that the contention regarding the protection afforded by Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act 1882 required further examination, granted leave to appeal.
- Does an agreement of sale in favour of a tenant in possession protect them against dispossession under Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act 1882?
- Section 53-A, Transfer of Property Act 1882
ORDER
1. ' S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by the petitioners against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 18-1-1986, whereby their writ petition was dismissed.
2. ' Muhammad Aslam respondent No,1 was permanently transferred the plot in dispute which was surrendered by one Bashir Ahmad, by the Settlement Authorities vide order dated 21-11-1982. The petitioners were in possession of the said plot. Respondent No,1 filed ejectment application against the petitioners before the Rent Controller. The petitioners resisted the same and denied the claim of ownership and relationship of landlord and tenant of the respondent No,1 on the ground that they have executed an agreement of sale of the said plot with Bashir Ahmad and paid the total amount of the plot to him before he surrendered the same. The petitioners also sought protection of their possession over the plot in question under section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act. The learned Rent Controller considered the plea of the petitioners and dismissed the ejectment application of the respondent No,1. His appeal before the Addl. District Judge was accepted and the petitioners were ordered to vacate the plot in dispute vide order dated 4-12-1985. Constitutional petition against this order filed by the petitioners was also dismissed in limine, vide impugned Judgment.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that an agreement of sale in favour of the tenant in possession protects him against his dispossession under section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act and in this context he relied on a reported case "Shamim Akhtar v. Muhammad Rasheed" (PLD 1989 SC 575).
4. ' The contention raised in support of this petition needs consideration and we, therefore, grant leave to appeal in this case. Security Rs,5,000.
5. ' Appeal is to be prepared on the present record, however, the parties are at liberty to file additional documents, if any.