PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English
← Back to rent laws

2013 MLD 1648 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Punjab · 2013

Full text

Syed TAFSIR HUSSAIN VS MUHAMMAD RASHID JANJUA 1996 SCMR 877, 2002 MLD 384, 2003 SCMR 1416, 2003 SCMR 1476, 2006 SCMR 946, 2007 MLD 1606, 2008 SCMR 1034, 2009 CLC 114, 2009 SCMR 1077, 2009 SCMR 1396, 2010 MLD 45, PLD 1991 SC 242, PLD 2006 Lah. 643, PLD 2006 Lah. 793, Cantonments Rent Restriction Act 1963--17 , Ejectment of Tenant--TERM , Part performance--Term , Pendency of suit--Term , Specific performance of agreement to sell--Term , Specific Relief Act 1877--12 , Stay of proceedings--Term , Transfer of Property Act 1882--53-A , S.17---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.12---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S.53-A---Ejectment of tenant---Stay of proceedings---Specific performance of agreement to sell---Pendency of suit---Part performance---Tenant resisted ejectment proceedings on the plea that he had filed suit for specific performance of agreement to sell and possession of premises was with him as part performance of the agreement---Validity---Tenant could not be protected from ejectment merely by asserting agreement to sell in his favour or by filing suit for specific performance of agreement to sell, unless sale-deed was executed in his favour and agreement to sell had been enforced---Filing of civil suit could not vitiate title of landlord unless the same was finally decided---Only those cases could be left to be decided by civil court, where intricate and complicated questions regarding title of immovable property were involved---Neither there was any dispute regarding ownership of landlord nor there was any intricate or complicated question involved about title of leased premises---Tenant had himself admitted that landlord was owner of the premises and he agreed to sell the same to him, there was no need to leave the matter to be decided by civil court---Tenant could not protect his possession over leased house by invoking provisions of S.53-A of Transfer of Property Act, 1882---Tenant failed to point out any illegality or material irregularity or legal or factual infirmity in eviction order passed by Rent Controller---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.