| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1980 SLG 3313 = 1980 SLD 3313 = 1980 CLC 1967 |
Lahore High Court
Second Appeal from Original Order No. 303 of 1979, decided on 28th January, 1980.
Presented By: Muhammad Ilyas, J
Masood Sadiq. v. Haji Muhammad Ali P I. D 1968 Lah. 1201 rel. Raja Said Akbar Khan for Appellant. Raja Muhammad Sabir for
Respondent.
Second Appeal from Original Order No. 303 of 1979, decided on 28th January, 1980.
Presented By: Muhammad Ilyas, J
Masood Sadiq. v. Haji Muhammad Ali P I. D 1968 Lah. 1201 rel. Raja Said Akbar Khan for Appellant. Raja Muhammad Sabir for
Respondent.
REHMAT DIN alias REHMAN DIN-Appellant
VERSUS
Mst. WILAYAT JAN-Respondent
Law: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959.
Section: 13-A
West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) S. 13-A read with Post Office Act (VI .of 1898), S. 3 (c) and Evidence Act (I of 1872), S. 114-Notice of transfer of ownership Service of-New owner sending notice under S. 13-A-Notice deli vered to close relative of tenant (petitioner) living in same house Such delivery held in accordance with relevant law and service of notice valid. Date of hearing : 28th January, 1980. JUDGMENT This second appeal has been filed by one Rehmat Din alias Rehman Din to call in question an order of ejectment made against him. 2. The impugned order relates to a house which was previously owned by one Allah Dad and his brother, Khuda Dad. On 29th Septem ber, 1967, when the house was occupied by the appellant as a tenant under them, it was purchased by the respondent, Mst Walayat Jan. She sought ejectment of the appellant alleging that he had committed default in the payment of rent and that she needed the house for her own occupation and for the purpose of reconstruction. The appellant resisted the application, inter alia, on the ground that after the purchase of the house, notice under section 13-A of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance. 1959, hereinafter referred to as the said Ordinance, was not served by her and, therefore, she could not ask for his eviction on the ground of default. It was, however, admitted by the appellant that he had not paid or tendered any rent to the respondent. The Rent Controller, who heard the application, framed a preliminary issue with regard to the service of the said notice and, after recording the parties evidence thereon, decided that issue against the appellant. Since the appellant had not alleged the payment or tender of any rent, the learned Rent Controller…