| Case ID |
00d4e429-a0db-486f-9b22-853491f08048 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Writ Petition No.245 of 2011 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 23, 2011 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court dismissed the petition, affirming the eviction order against the tenant for default in rent payment under the Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009. The court ruled that the brick kiln was classified as rented land, thus falling under the jurisdiction of the Rent Tribunal. The petitioner failed to prove the existence of a new lease agreement and was deemed a wilful defaulter for late payment of rent. The court found no merit in the arguments presented by the petitioner regarding the nature of the property and the jurisdiction of the tribunal, concluding that the eviction proceedings were valid and lawful. |
| Summary |
The case revolves around the eviction of Muhammad Saleem Khan from a brick kiln premises under the Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009. The tenant contended that the premises constituted a factory, arguing that the proceedings under the Act were not maintainable. The Lahore High Court, however, clarified the definition of 'rented land' within the Act, stating that the brick kiln and associated structures fell under this classification. The petitioner was unable to demonstrate a new lease agreement, and the court emphasized that late rent payments constituted wilful default. The ruling underscores the importance of adhering to legal definitions and the strict enforcement of tenancy laws. The decision is pivotal for landlords and tenants navigating rental agreements and eviction processes within the jurisdiction of the Punjab Rented Premises Act. This case serves as a precedent for future disputes regarding the classification of properties under rental laws, highlighting the necessity of clear agreements and timely payments. The court's decision reinforces the legal framework governing rented properties in Punjab, establishing a clear distinction between residential and commercial premises, particularly in cases involving factories and kilns. Legal representatives must be diligent in framing lease agreements to avoid ambiguities that could lead to disputes like this. Keywords: eviction, Punjab Rented Premises Act, wilful default, rental laws, tenancy agreements. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
|
| Judges |
IJAZ AHMAD, J
|
| Lawyers |
Muhammad Akram Sheikh,
Sajeel Sheheryar,
Muhammad Javed Niazi
|
| Petitioners |
MUHAMMAD SALEEM KHAN
|
| Respondents |
others,
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, TAXILA
|
| Citations |
2012 SLD 573 = 2012 CLC 1158
|
| Other Citations |
Abdul Hamid v. Muhammad Rafique Chaudhry and 2 others PLD 1987 Lahore 599,
Raja Khurshid Ali v. Dr. Abdul Malik 1991 SCMR 1944,
Ghanshiam Das v. Debi Prasad and another AIR 1966 SC 1998,
Prabhulal Potadia v. State 1966 Cr.LJ 228,
Uttamchand v. S.M. Lalwani AIR1965 SC 716,
Izhar Alam Farooqi, Advocate v. Sheikh Abdul Sattar Lasi and others 2008 SCMR 240,
Executive District Officer Schools and Literacy, District Dir Lower and others v. Qamar Dost Khan and others 2006 SCMR 1630,
Col. (Retd.) Syed Mukhtar Hussain Shah v. Wasim Sajjad and 30 others PLD 1986 SC 178,
Dilawar Jan v. Gul Rehman and 5 others PLD 2001 SC 149,
Ch. Mussarat Ahmad v. Ch. Fazal Ahmad 2004 YLR 2905,
Zhange Gougen v. Mst. Jahanzeba Begum W.P.No.372 of 2009
|
| Laws Involved |
Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009
|
| Sections |
9,
5,
2(a)
|