Case Details

Citation(s)
1980 SLG 1695 1980 SLD 1695 = 1980 CLC 231
Sindh High Court
Second Appeal No. 227 of 1973, 10/05/1978
Z.A. CHANNA, J

Haji Muhammad TaqiVSSher Muhammad

Law:

Section:

Keywords: Failure, Arrears Of Rent, Delay, Ejectment, Trial Court, Premises, Deposits, Rent Controller, Orders, Defence, Landlord, Confinement, Order, Payment Of Rent, Objections, Cease, Tenancy, Plea, Division, Offer, Evidence, Period, Copies, Production, Rent, Possession, Grounds, Erroneous Decision, Certificate, Tenant, Set Aside, Payment, Wilful Default, Discharge Result: Appeal accepted JUDGMENT This appeal under section 15(4) of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, is directed against the order of the learned Ist Appellate Court passed on 5th June, 1973, whereby it accepted the appeal of the respondent and reversed the order, dated 9th March, 1973, passed by the learned Rent Controller, striking of the defence of the respondent and ordering his ejectment from the premises occupied by him, 2. The brief facts, for the purposes of this appeal, are that the appellant is the landlord and the respondent is the tenant of a shop located on Plot No. 45, in Morio Khan village, near the Airport, on a monthly tenancy of Rs. 50. 1n May, 1971, the appellant filed a rent application against the respondent seeking his ejectment on the grounds of default in the payment of rent, requirement of the premises for the personal use of the landlord and raising of unauthorised construction by the tenant. On 4th October, 1971, the learned Rent Controller passed an order under section 13 (6) of the Rent Restriction Ordinance, requiring the respondent to deposit arrears of rent and also future rent. The future rent was required to be deposited before the 15th of the month following the month for which the rent was due. The rent for the month of November, 1971, being deposited by the respondent on 3rd January, 1972, instead of before the 15th of December, 1971, the applicant filed an application, on 2nd August, 1972, for striking off the defence of the res pondent. In reply, the respondent urged two grounds for failure to deposit the rent of November in time. His first ground was that because of the war with India in the month of December, the normal life in the City of Karachi had become paralysed, and therefore, it was not possible for him to deposit the rent.…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register