Case Details

Citation(s)
1982 SLG 241 1982 SLD 241 = 1982 PLD 182

First Rent Appeal No. 29 of 1980, decided on 16th September, 1981.
Naimuddin, J

MOHAMMAD HANIF--Petitioner

VERSUS

Mst. SARA-Respondent

Law:

Section:

First Rent Appeal No. 292 of 1980 by Wali and First Rent Appeal No. 29 of 1980 by Muhammad Hanif, both under section 21 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, raise common questions of fact and law and I, therefore, propose to dispose them of by this common judgment.   The facts giving rise to these appeals briefly stated are as follows.   The respondent is the owner and landlady of the building constructed on plot No. 716, corresponding to Excise and Taxation Department No. AKI6-S-27, situated at Shah Waliullah Road, Liaquat Colony, Gali No. 1, Karachi. The building consists of 6 rooms as deposed to by the respondent in her cross-examination in Rent Case No. 6391 of 1977, filed by her against Wali, out of which First Rent Appeal No. 292 of 1980 has arisen.   The tenement occupied by appellant Mohammad Hanif as tenant on a rent of Rs. 25 per month consists of only one room. The tenement occupied by appellant Wali as a tenant on rent of Rs. 60 per month consists of only 4 rooms. One room was in occupation of another tenant namely, Adam. The respondent had purchased this property from its previous owner/ landlord on 28-51975, as stated at the bar.   In October, 1977, the respondent filed three separate applications under section 13 of the Sind Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1969 (hereinafter called the Ordinance) against all the aforesaid tenants on the grounds of default in payment of rent and requirement of the premises by the respondent for the personal use. All the three tenants denied both the grounds and separately pleaded that the application was mala fide as the respondent had demanded enhanced rent and on refusal she filed the applications. Each of them further pleaded that notice under section 13-A was not served on him. In all three cases the learned Controller framed the following issues;   "(1) Whether the applicant required the premises in application, in good faith for her occupation and for the occupation of her children?   Whether the opponent has committed default in payment of rent to the applicant?   Whether the application is not maintainable for want of notice under section 13-A of the West…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register