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

2012 PLD 305 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Punjab · 2012

Full text

ABDUL WAHAB VS ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, OKARA Constitutional petition--TERM , Illegal Dispossession Act 2005--3 , Illegal Dispossession Act 2005--5 , Illegal Dispossession Act 2005--7 , Ss. 3, 5 & 7---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition--- Prevention of illegal possession of property, investigation and procedure, eviction and mode of recovery as an interim relief---Possession on basis of Patadari---Compromise between the parties---Functus officio---Lessee (petitioner) were in possession of the disputed land on basis of Patadari and on expiry of the agreement allegedly illegally possessed the land---Lessor (respondent) filed complaint against the lessee under the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 and during trial, Trial Court disposed of the matter as having been compromised---Under the terms of the compromise, lessee presented a cheque to the lessor which was dishonoured and lessor contending that lessee had violated the terms of the compromise, moved application before Trial Court for restoration of possession of land, which was allowed---Validity---In the compromise agreement possession of lessee had specifically been accepted by lessor and it was an admitted fact that lessee was previously in possession of the land as Patadar---In view of the compromise, possession of lessee remained lawful and not illegal or that of a trespasser, however condition of payment of lease amount was fixed and lessee issued cheques for making the payment, which 'subsequently were dishonoured---Trial Court never termed the possession of the lessee as illegal and complaint filed by lessor was disposed of in terms of the compromise, subsequent to which no proceedings remained pending before the Trial Court---Subsequent order passed by Trial Court for the restoration of possession on the basis of violation of the terms and conditions of the compromise, was without jurisdiction as Trial Court had become functus officio after passing the compromise order---No provision existed in the Illegal Dispossession Act 2005, for restoration of the possession of the property in dispute subsequent to the disposal of the complaint---Impugned order of Trial Court was illegal, without any jurisdiction and ineffective upon the rights of the lessee---Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.