MUSHTAQUE AHMED vs SHAHZAD KHAN S — 2024 PLD 960 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

MUSHTAQUE AHMED VS SHAHZAD KHAN S. 22---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 204---Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O. XXVII, R. 1---Eviction order---Execution proceedings---Rent Controller as the Executing Court---Scope---Contempt proceedings for violation of order of the Supreme Court---Ejectment order passed by the Rent Controller was affirmed in the First Rent Appeal, and thereafter it was further affirmed by the High Court, and finally, the litigation culminated in the Supreme Court when the counsel for the tenant voluntarily gave a statement on behalf of his client that he shall vacate the premises if some reasonable time was accorded to him, which request was acceded to by the petitioner's (landlord's) counsel, and the civil petition in the Supreme Court was disposed of accordingly---Ejectment order, on affirmation, was merged into the appellate order, which was further merged into the High Court Order, and in the end, all previous orders were merged into the final order passed by the Supreme Court---Present issue correlated only to the execution of the ejectment order, and despite the defeat of the tenant at all levels, the ejectment order could not be satisfied by the Executing Court due to flimsy and insubstantial pretends and pretexts which unnecessarily dragged the execution proceedings---Final order passed under the provisions of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 ('the Ordinance') are executable by the Rent Controller and all questions arising between parties and relating to the execution, discharge, or satisfaction of the order shall be determined by the Controller and not by a separate suit---So in all fairness, the Rent Controller is bound to execute the ejectment order expeditiously---Even if there was any civil dispute pending in any civil court instituted by some other persons against the petitioner (landlord) and they were claiming the right of inheritance in the subject property, even then, the tenant could not take any benefit or advantage of any such dispute or litigation which had nothing to do with him---Decision in any such legal proceedings, if any, would remain restricted to resolving the rights between the alleged legal heirs but would not grant any independent or proprietary rights to the tenant, who was bound to vacate the premises in accordance with the ejectment order affirmed by the appellate court, High Court, and finally, the Supreme Court, in view of the statement of the counsel representing the tenant---Supreme Court directed the Executing Court to execute the ejectment order expeditiously in accordance with law without any further delay or hindrance and hand over the possession of the demised premises to the petitioner/landlord and submit the compliance report to the Supreme Court---Criminal Original Petition was disposed of accordingly.

MUSHTAQUE AHMED vs SHAHZAD KHAN S — 2024 PLD 960 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD