2018 YLR 313 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Full text

TARIQ SIDDIQUE VS ADDITIONAL RENT CONTROLLER S. 15---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. I, R. 10--- Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---eviction petition---Application by respondent for impleading as party claiming such right on the basis of agreement to sell of rented premises---Entitlement---Scope---Landlord contended that respondent was not entitled to be impleaded on the basis of agreement to sell as he was neither a necessary nor a proper party regarding ejectment proceedings---Applicant contended that his application for impleadment was rightly accepted and that interlocutory order of Rent Controller could not be challenged under constitutional jurisdiction of High Court, besides said petition of the landlord was hit by principle of laches---Applicant under O. I, R. 10, C.P.C. had filed his claim challenging the validity of ownership of the landlord; he had filed a suit for declaration, with regard to his said claim, which was concurrently dismissed---Scrutiny of contention of the applicant and impugned order whereby he was allowed to be impleaded in the ejectment petition, showed that Rent Controller had wrongly allowed him to be impleaded in the ejectment petition on the basis of an agreement to sell which was already dispelled---Interlocutory order though could be challenged through final appeal, but when the order had left the petitioner with no remedy, and the order affected the right of petitioner, invocation of constitutional jurisdiction was not precluded---Impugned order of the Rent Controller impleading an alien as owner who had no locus standi with the rented premises was not justified---Impeachment of interim order if not allowed at proper stage, same would lead to the wastage of public time and multiply the litigation between the parties---Court could not dismiss lis on the ground of laches if the same defeated the cause of justice and perpetuated injustice---Rent Controller by allowing respondent to be impleaded in the ejectment petition, had violated law and caused grave injustice---Impugned order of the Rent Controller was set aside---Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.