Law:

Section:

  West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959), S. 15-Appeal lies under S. 15 both from final and inter locutory order (e.g., order by Rent Controller fixing rate of rent to be paid as arrears under S. 13 (6) of Ordinance-[Muhammad Baqa Ullah Khan v. Mian Muhammad Rashid P L D 1961 Lah. 638 and Faqir Chand v. Mst. Bibi Zulekha P L D 1962 Pesh. 1 ref.].   West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959), S. 13 (6)-"Default" of tenant in paying rent by 5th of every month pending proceedings-"Default" defined-Depends on circumstances of each case-(Controller not bound to strike off tenant's defence in every case)-[Sh. Muhammad Nawaz and others v. Muhammad Azeem and others P L D 1961 Lah. 788 ref. And Dr. Ryas Dobash v. Muhammad lqbal P L D 1960 Lah. 1112 dissented from]. JUDGMENT   INAMULLAH, J.-Mst. Shah Jahan filed an appeal under section 15 (4) of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 against the order of the learned District Judge, Hyderabad dated the 31st July 1961. The appeal came for hearing before a Single Judge of this seat, who because of the importance of the questions raised and also because of difference of opinion on those points, has referred the following questions for decision to a Division Bench.   Whether the learned District Judge was competent to entertain an appealunder section 15 (b) of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959, from an order which was not final ;   Whether the Rent Controller was bound under section 13 (6) of the WestPakistan Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959, to order the eviction of the tenant if he committed default in payment of rent under the orders of the Rent Con troller before the 5th day of any month.   I propose to dispose of these points separately.   In the case of Muhammad Baqa Ullah Khan v. Mian Muhammad Rashid (P L D 1961 Lah. 638) the Appellate Authority under section 15 of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance VI of 1959, (hereinafter called the Ordinance) came to the conclusion that no appeal lay against the order of the Rent Controller as the order appealed against did not fall…