| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1999 SLD 813 = 1999 CLC 1090 |
Sindh High Court
First, Rent Appeal No. 108 of 1992, decided on 10th September, 1998.
Presented By: Before Ikram Ahmed Ansari, J
NadimAzhar Siddiqui for Appellant. Atta-ur-Rehman for
Respondent No. l Nemo for
Respondent No.2.
First, Rent Appeal No. 108 of 1992, decided on 10th September, 1998.
Presented By: Before Ikram Ahmed Ansari, J
NadimAzhar Siddiqui for Appellant. Atta-ur-Rehman for
Respondent No. l Nemo for
Respondent No.2.
Messrs SASI (PVT.) LIMITED---Appellant
VERSUS
Messrs STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN and another---Respondents
Law: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979
Section: 15
Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S. 15---Subletting---Onus to prove such plea is on landlord and not on the tenant---Where landlord had alleged subletting and accepted rent from tenants without protest for quite a long time, allegation of subletting was not proved. Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S. 15---Plea of subletting---Proof---Person holding valid general power of attorney on behalf of the landlord was not examined as a witness by the Rent Controller--- -Landlord had failed to show that out of two tenements which had been sublet by the tenant and what rent was being realised by the tenant for alleged subletting---Rent Controller had ordered ejectment of the tenant--Validity---Held, there was no lawful evidence in support of the pleas raised by the landlord, except pleadings and the same could not take place of evidence, and, as such, no subletting was proved by the landlord---Rent Controller had erred in ordering ejectment of tenant on said plea ---Ejectment order passed by the Rent Controller was set aside in circumstances. Messrs Adil Brothers (Private) Limited v. Pakistan National Shipping Corporation 1995 CLC 1652 and Dost Muhammad v. Mst. Ramzan Bibi and 9 others 1990 MLD 1667 rel. NadimAzhar Siddiqui for Appellant. Atta-ur-Rehman for Respondent No. l Nemo for Respondent No.2. Date of hearing: 30th April, 1998. JUDGMENT Through this appeal the appellant has challenged the order, …