PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Muhammad Munir vs Mansoor Rasheed S — 2025 MLD 1897 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2025 MLD 1897 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
MLD
Parties
Muhammad Munir vs Mansoor Rasheed S
Subject matter
Constitutional
Provisions referred to
S. 15---P; S. 2; Punjab Waqf Properties Ordinance (IV of 1979); Punjab Waqf Properties Ordinance; Punjab Rented Premises Act

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

Judgment text as reported

Muhammad Munir VS Mansoor Rasheed S. 15---Punjab Waqf Properties Ordinance (IV of 1979), S.2(e)---Eviction petition---Relationship of landlord and tenant, denial of---Determination---Waqf property being demised premises---Scope---Claim of eviction petitioner was concurrently dismissed---Validity---In the present case, in view of respective claims of both the parties exhibited Waqf-deed became of great import----Perusal of said Waqf-deed revealed that the original owner specifically dedicated premises in question as well as rent derived there from for waqf to be paid to the deserving institution; it was pre-condition in the Waqf-deed that premises-in-question as well as other properties, mentioned therein, would not be subject to further alienation---Thus, a specific clog was imposed in the Waqf-deed on using the premises- in-question for the personal benefit of legal heirs, so S.2(e) of the Punjab Waqf Properties Ordinance, 1979, would not come to rescue the petitioner---Waqf means the permanent dedication by a person professing Islam of any property for any purpose recognized by the Muslim as religious, pious or charitable---Waqf is always of permanent character---Even otherwise, the petitioner while appearing as a witness, instead of concurring his version in specific words, deposed statement which left no room to hold that he badly failed to prove his status as landlord of the premises in question; in other words, when the petitioner did not succeed in establishing that he was landlord of the premises in question, he was precluded to move an application, seeking eviction of the respondents under the Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009---Thus, there existed no relationship of landlord and tenant between the petitioner and the respondents---Eviction order was thus patently illegal and the appellate Court was fully justified to set-aside the eviction order, passed by Special Judge (Rent), through the impugned judgment, which was unexceptionable---Constitutional petition was dismissed.

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English