Pakistan Case Law← Search
1995 MLD 446

MUHAMMAD AMIN and others vs Syed KAZIM HUSSAIN and others

Citation1995 MLD 446
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Writ Petition No, 4280 of 1993
Date1994-04-02
Judge(s)Malik Muhammad Qayyum
ResultOrder accordingly

' This judgment shall dispose of W.Ps. Nos. 4280/93 and 4331/93 as common questions of law and facts arise therein.

2. The petitioners in both these petitions have assailed order dated 21-2-1993 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Gujranwala whereby pending the decision of a suit for specific performance of an agreement for sale instituted by respondents Nos. 1 and 2, the proceedings in the two ejectment petitions filed by the petitioners were stayed.

3. Mr. Amir. Alam Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that there was no jurisdiction vested in the Rent Controller to have stayed the proceedings in the ejectment petitions merely because of pendency of a suit for specific performance instituted by respondents Nos. 1 and 2 against the petitioners. In the alternative, the learned counsel has argued that the Rent Controller instead of staying the proceedings, should have consolidated the ejectment petition and the suit for specific performance and decided the same together.

4. The latter course suggested by the petitioners' learned counsel appears to be just and proper in the circumstances of the case and finds approval from the judgment of this Court in Dr. Arslan Razzaq v. All Hussain (PLD 1993 Lah. 97) wherein it was observed that in such circumstances, the Civil Judge, hearing the suit and trying ejectment petition as a Rent Controller should consolidate both the proceedings so as to ensure fairness to both the parties.

5. Mr. M. Farani, learned counsel for respondents Nos. 1 and 2 has also fairly conceded that it would be conducive in the interest of justice if both the matters be tried and decided together by one Court after holding consolidated proceedings.

' In view of what has been stated above, both these petitions are allowed and the impugned orders are declared to be without any lawful authority and of no legal effect. The learned District Judge shall entrust the ejectment petitions to the same Court where the suit for specific performance of agreement for sale filed by respondents Nos. 1 and 2 against the petitioners is pending whereafter, the learned Civil Judge/Rent Controller shall consolidate the proceedings in the ejectment petitions and the civil suit and shall try and decide the same together.

' No order as to costs.

For educational and research use only β€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerΒ·PrivacyΒ·TermsΒ·Search