2010 PLD 709 SUPREME-COURT

Full text

MAHBOOB ELAHI VS Mst. HAMIDA BEGUM 1980 CLC 2145, 1984 CLC 2804, 1995 MLD 1104, PLD 2003 Quetta 68, Constitution of Pakistan 1973--185 , Ejectment petition--term , West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959--13 , West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959--2 , Ss. 2(b), 13(2)(iv), (3)(a)(i)(ii), (4) & (5)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Ejectment petition---Bona fide personal need of landlord and reconstruction of premises--- eviction of tenant ordered by Rent Controller--- Failure of landlord to demolish/re-construct premises within prescribed period---Composite application by tenant to Rent Controller for convicting and punishing landlord and putting him back into possession of premises---Maintainability--- Proceedings under S.13(5) & (5-A) of the Ordinance, though inter dependant, but were independent---Legislature in S.13(5) of the Ordinance in contradistinction to term "Controller" had used term "Court", but in S.13(5-A) thereof had used term "Controller" twice---Term "Controller" had been defined in S.2(b) of the Ordinance whereas neither term "Court" had been defined therein nor had procedure for trial of an offence punishable under S.13(5) thereof been defined therein---Cognizance of offence under S.13(5) of Ordinance, could, thus, be taken on tenant's application only be ordinary Court of criminal jurisdiction under Criminal Procedure Code, 1898---Right of tenant to apply to Rent Controller for restoration of possession of premises would accrue only on conviction of landlord by Court under S.13(5) of the Ordinance---Consequent upon trial and conviction of landlord by criminal Court, Rent Controller upon tenant's application would assume jurisdiction under S.13(5-A) of the Ordinance, but not otherwise---Rent Controller would only inquire as to whether landlord had been convicted by Court and whether premises had been demolished or not---Rent Controller, if found that landlord had been convicted by Court under S.13(5) of the Ordinance and that premises had not been demolished, would direct restoration of possession thereof to the tenant---Rent Controller had no jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide such composite application of tenant under S.13(5) & (5-A) of the Ordinance, Principles.