2007 YLR 2995 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Full text

JAVED IQBAL VS DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, CIRCLE LAHORE Civil Procedure Code --Order XXXIX of C.P.C. Temporary Injunctions and Interlocutory Orders--1 , Civil Procedure Code --Order XXXIX of C.P.C. Temporary Injunctions and Interlocutory Orders--2 , Specific Relief Act 1877--42 , Specific Relief Act 1877--54 , Transfer of Property Act 1882--116 , ---O.XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss. 42 & 54---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), 5.116---Application, for grant of interim relief --Plaintiff filed suit for declaration and permanent injunction against his eviction from the premises of book shop in the college---Plaintiff along wits .suit filed application for grant of interim relief, which application was concurrently dismissed by the courts below---Validity---Plea of plaintiff was that he was lessee under -agreement which allowed lease of said premises for book shop inside the college compound for a period of one year at monthly rent---Contention of plaintiff was that he should be deemed to be holding over under Section116 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 as lessee on the terms contained in said lease agreement---Plaintiff had further submitted that impugned notice of termination of lease was illegal---Submission of authorities was that alleged agreement was not one of lease, but was .contract to provide services at the premises of the college and its duration, which was specifically limited to one year, had expired---Authorities had denied that they had recovered any rent from plaintiff for the post-expiry period---Amounts allegedly deposited by the plaintiff in the authorities' bank account without permission, authority or consent of the college, could not enure to the benefit of the plaintiff---No acceptance , of rent was made in circumstances in terms of S.116 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, nor assent by the authorities had been given to the plaintiff to continue in possession of contracted premises---Plaintiff had not placed any receipt from authorities on record to show that rent had. been received and acknowledged---Unilateral payments made into some Bank account without concurrence and acknowledgment of authorities, did not prima facie support the plea of holding over---Plaintiff did, not have a prima-facie case, balance of convenience too lay in favour of Authorities ---No case, in circumstances, was made out for inter¬ference with concurrent view expressed by courts below.