| Case ID |
229e88c8-ae4d-4ac2-81e4-8a7fe1c10f10 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Constitutional Petition No.D-167 of 1998 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 23, 1998 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Constitutional petition filed by the petitioners was dismissed due to the existence of an alternate remedy under the Sindh Local Government Ordinance, 1979. The court found that the enhancement of rent was a consent order acted upon by the majority of tenants, and the petitioners failed to provide a plausible explanation for not availing the alternate remedy. The court emphasized that the petition involved disputed questions of fact, which were not suitable for resolution in writ jurisdiction. The decision reiterated the principle that availability of alternate remedies does not bar the exercise of constitutional jurisdiction, but when such remedies are equally adequate and efficacious, the High Court will not intervene. |
| Summary |
In the case of ABDUL GHAFOOR and others vs. LARKANA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, the Sindh High Court addressed a constitutional petition challenging the enhancement of rent for shops occupied by tenants. The petitioners contended that the rent was increased without due process, claiming the enhancement was illegal and violated their tenancy rights. However, the court found that the petitioners had consented to the enhanced rates, as evidenced by the actions of the majority of tenants. The court ruled that the petition was not maintainable due to the availability of alternate remedies under the Sindh Local Government Ordinance, as well as the disputed factual nature of the case. The ruling highlighted the importance of alternate remedies and the requirement for petitioners to justify why such remedies were inadequate. This case underscores the balance between tenant rights and municipal authority in rent matters, emphasizing the legal frameworks governing such disputes. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Larkana Municipal Corporation
|
| Judges |
ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR,
ANWAR ZAHEER JAMALI
|
| Lawyers |
Moohan Lal K. Makhijani,
Muhammad Nawaz Chandio,
Ali Azhar Tunio
|
| Petitioners |
ABDUL GHAFOOR,
others
|
| Respondents |
others,
LARKANA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
|
| Citations |
1999 SLD 891 = 1999 CLC 885
|
| Other Citations |
The Murree Brewery Co. Ltd. v. Pakistan through the Secretary to Government of Pakistan Works Division and 2 others PLD 1972 SC 279,
United Sugar Mills Ltd., Karachi v. District Magistrate, Sukkur and another PLD 1979 Kar. 410,
Pir Sabir Shah v. Federation of Pakistan and others PLD 1994 SC 738,
Messrs Sharafali Ghulam Hussain Gani v. Government of Pakistan and 3 others 1989 MLD 1440,
Abdul Rehman v. The Province of Sindh and 3 others 1986 CLC 2635,
Ataur Rehman Khan v. Dost Muhammad and others 1986 SCMR 598,
Syed Saghir Ali v. Mehar Din and others 1968 SCMR 729,
Mst. Nafis Fatima v. Syed Muhammad Mashooq and another 1987 MLD 2755,
Naraindas and another v. Hinanand and 2 others 1987 MLD 464,
Export Promotion Bureau v. Qaiser Shafiullah 1994 SCMR 859,
Messrs Norwich Union Fire Insurance Society Limited v. Muhammad Javed Iqbal and another 1986 SCMR 1071,
Raunaq Ali v. Chief Settlement Commissioner PLD 1973 SC 236
|
| Laws Involved |
Constitution of Pakistan (1973),
Sindh Local Government Ordinance (XVII of 1979)
|
| Sections |
199,
108,
113
|