MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN and others vs ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE and others
This matter arises from petitions seeking leave to appeal against an order of the Lahore High Court, which had dismissed writ petitions challenging an appellate remand order in ejectment proceedings and directed the petitioners to vacate the premises within four months. The core legal question was whether the High Court, while examining a challenge limited to an order of remand passed by the lower appellate court, acted lawfully in going beyond the remand issue to direct the vacation of the premises. The Supreme Court held that the High Court's order was not sustainable as it exceeded the scope of the controversy before it, which was confined solely to the legality of the remand order. Consequently, the Court converted the petitions into appeals, set aside the impugned order of the High Court, and directed the Rent Controller to expeditiously decide the ejectment petitions within six months. The key principle laid down is that a reviewing court in writ jurisdiction must confine its adjudication to the specific order and issues challenged before it.
- Can the High Court direct the vacation of premises when the writ petition only challenges an appellate remand order?
- Whether an appellate court is justified in remanding an ejectment case after reversing the Rent Controller's finding on the relationship of landlord and tenant?
- What is the proper scope of adjudication for the High Court when a remand order passed by a lower appellate court is assailed?
ORDER
SH. RIAZ AHMAD, J.- Facts giving rise to the institution of these three petitions are that the respondents instituted applications for the ejectment of the petitioners from a house in their possession. The learned Rent Controller seized of the case, framed preliminary issues as to whether the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties existed or not. The learned Rent Controller held that no such relationship existed and thus the application for ejectment was dismissed. The order of the Rent Controller was then assailed in appeal in the Court of learned Addl.
District Judge who reversed the findings of the Rent Controller and came to the conclusion, that relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the parties. The learned Addl. District Judge while holding so, remanded the case to the Rent Controller with the direction to frame further issues in the case and to adjudicate the controversy on merits. The remand order passed by the Appellate Court was challenged through writ petition in the High Court and vide order impugned, the learned Judge of the Lahore High Court dismissed all the three writ petitions and directed the petitioners to vacate the premises and to hand over its possession to the respondents within 4 months.
2. Aggrieved by the said order, the three petitioners seek leave to appeal, Caveator, Muhammad Yaseen has entered appearance. The learned counsel for the respondents stated that such order could not have been passed by the learned Judge of the Lahore High Court because only the remand order had been assailed and the learned Judge of the Lahore High Court ought to have confined himself to judge the legality or otherwise of the remand order.
3. After hearing both sides we are of the view that the order impugned is not sustainable and therefore we convert these petitions into appeals, set aside the order of the Lahore High Court and direct the learned Rent Controller to proceed with the disposal of the petitions on expeditious basis so that these petitions are disposed of within a period of 6 months.
Final report shall be sent by the Rent Controller with regard to the disposal of the petition to the Assistant Registrar, of this Court at Lahore. Parties are directed to appear before the Rent Controller on 27th March, 2000.