Case ID |
4258c3b2-f633-48ca-b49f-ffe2906e0ae2 |
Body |
View case body. Login to View |
Case Number |
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 323-R of 19 |
Decision Date |
Jul 01, 1989 |
Hearing Date |
|
Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan dismissed the petition for leave to appeal in the case concerning the Cantonments Rent Restriction Act. The petitioner, a tenant, challenged the High Court's decision that allowed the landlord's appeal for eviction on the grounds of reconstruction. The court found that the proposed reconstruction was not solely for residential purposes but involved a composite building. Thus, the bar under section 14 of the Act was not applicable, allowing the landlord to seek eviction. The court affirmed the High Court's ruling and refused the leave to appeal. |
Summary |
This case revolves around the interpretation of the Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, particularly sections 14 and 17(2)(vi), and their application in the context of the reconstruction of rental properties. The Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed whether the landlord's intention to reconstruct a building, which comprised both commercial and residential units, could be impeded by the provisions of the Act. The court concluded that since the reconstruction was not limited to residential use alone, the tenant could be evicted under the law. This case highlights the complexities in landlord-tenant disputes and the legal nuances in property law, making it significant for future references in similar cases. The decision underscores the importance of understanding the dual-use nature of properties and the legal frameworks governing them. |
Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
Entities Involved |
Not available
|
Judges |
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH,
S. USMAN ALI SHAH
|
Lawyers |
ASHFAQ AHMED
|
Petitioners |
Mst. SHEERIN BAI MUHAMMAD ALI
|
Respondents |
Not available
|
Citations |
1991 SLD 1239,
1991 SCMR 1497
|
Other Citations |
Not available
|
Laws Involved |
Cantonments Rent Restriction Act,
Constitution of Pakistan
|
Sections |
14,
17(2)(vi),
185(3)
|