Naveed Ahmad vs Learned Additional District Judge-XI, West, Islamabad Ss — 2026 YLR 842 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Citation: 2026 YLR 842 ISLAMABAD
Court: Islamabad High Court
Year: 2026
Reporter: YLR
Parties: Naveed Ahmad vs Learned Additional District Judge-XI, West, Islamabad Ss
Subject matter: Constitutional
Provisions referred to: S. 17; S. 35---C; S. 35; S. 5; Registration Act (XVI of 1908); Stamp Act (II of 1899); Registration Act; Stamp Act; Islamabad Rent Restriction Ordinance

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

Naveed Ahmad VS Learned Additional District Judge-XI, West, Islamabad Ss. 5 & 17---Registration Act (XVI of 1908), S. 17 (d)---Stamp Act (II of 1899), S. 35---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Ejectment of tenant---Non-registration of tenancy agreement--- Payment of stamp duty---Principle--- Petitioner / tenant was aggrieved of eviction order passed by Rent Controller which was maintained by Lower Appellate Court---Plearaised by petitioner/tenant was that unregistered tenancy agreement could not have been implemented---Validity---Any lease whose period has been fixed for one year i.e. 12 months or more, then it is compulsorily registerable in terms of S.17(d) of Registration Act, 1908---Such lease agreement if not registered under the law then it should not be considered valid for the purposes of creating any right, assignment, title, or interest vested or contingent in future---If parties agrees to specific terms with regard to cost of stamp duty or any fee to be borne by any party to the agreement, then that provision of the agreement would prevail---In absence of an agreement to the contrary, the pertinent duty is to be borne by the executant of the instrument---Respondent / landlord was under an obligation to get the instrument registered by all means in terms of stamp duty, pursuant to S.35 of Stamp Act, 1899, and to get the instrument registered before Rent Controller in terms of S.5 of Islamabad Rent Restriction Ordinance, 2001, from the date of the amendment, i.e., 01.12.2021, which was prospective in nature---High Court directed respondent / landlord to get lease agreement registered accordingly and till its registration Rent Controller would not proceed in eviction proceedings---Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR

2026 YLR 1023 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHSyed Najam Raza Naqvi VS Mst. Badar Jahan S. 115(2)---Revisional jurisdiction of District Judge---Scope---Jurisdiction of District Judge to…
2026 YLR 606 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRMohsin Shamim VS State. Ss. 302(b), 324, 109, 147, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, abetment, rioting, rioting armed wi…
2026 YLR 1023 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHSyed Najam Raza Naqvi VS Mst. Badar Jahan S.115---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Jurisdiction of High Court to revise a "ca…
2026 YLR 625 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTLIAQUAT ALI VS STATE Motive---Scope---Motive is a double-edged weapon which cuts both sides in like manner, as such, false implication of ac…
2026 YLR 1121 ISLAMABADMuhammad Muneeb Arshad VS Mst. Ammara Mahroof S. 17---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss. 10 & 11---Res sub judice and res judicata---Appl…
2026 YLR 1121 ISLAMABADMuhammad Muneeb Arshad VS Mst. Ammara Mahroof Election, doctrine of---Double proceedings---Where two fora are invoked for substantially the…

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