Case Details

Citation(s)
1991 SLD 1823 = 1991 CLC 1733
Sindh High Court
First Rent Appeal No.553 of 1989, decided on 7th March, 1991.
Presented By: Before Mukhtar Ahmed Junejo, J
Khaliq Humayun for Appellant. Waqar Lodhi for
Respondent.

TARIQ NLAZ --- Appellant

VERSUS

MASOODA BEGUM---Respondent

Law: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979

Section: 15 , 16 (1)

Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ---Ss. 15 & 16---Default in payment of rent---Proof---Tenant's plea was that on the date the application for ejectment was filed, he was not in default---Such plea even if accepted, no rent having been paid by tenant within statutory period of sixty days, plea about application for eviction being premature was of academic nature only---Tenant had offered no explanation as to why he did not pay or offer rent to landlord for the period in question---No rent was paid or offered to landlord or even deposited in Court before passing of order under provisions of S.16(1), Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979---Tenant was thus, proved to have committed default in payment of rent---Rent Controller's order was maintained in circumstances. Khaliq Humayun for Appellant. Waqar Lodhi for Respondent. Date of hearing: 4th March, 1991 . JUDGMENT This is a tenant's appeal against an order of ejectment passed on 31-5 1989 by the IIIrd Senior Civil Judge and Rent Controller Karachi Central. Admittedly the appellant was tenant of the respondent/landlady in the premises in litigation viz. House No. B-177, Block 10, F.B. Area, Karachi, on rent of Rs. 1,000 per month. There was such an agreement between the parties dated 27-2-1981. On 2-12-1984 respondent Mst. Masooda Begum filed Rent Application No. 4177/1984 under section 14 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (hereinafter to be mentioned as the Ordinance) for eviction of the appellant from the premises in litigation, on the ground that she (landlady) required the premises in perfect good faith bona fide for her personal use and occupation, as she was at the fag-end of her life. She also alleged that appellant was a defaulter in payment of rent and had not paid rent with effect from 1-7-   1984. Subsequently Rent Case ' No. 4177/84 was renumbered as Rent Case No. 2733/85. The rent case was contested by the appellant who filed his written statement controverting the main averments made in the rent application. During pendency of the rent case, rent order under section 16 (I) was passed on 30-11-1985 and on 24-5-1986. The respondent moved an application for…
πŸ”’
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register