| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1993 SLG 1122 1993 SLD 1122 = 1993 PLD 101 |
Lahore High Court
S.A.O. No. 6 of 1991, decided on 2nd December, 1992. DATE ofhearing- 29th November 1992
KHALID PAUL KHAWAJA
Sh. Khalil-ur-Rehman for Appellants. Mian Muzaffar Hussain for
Respondent
S.A.O. No. 6 of 1991, decided on 2nd December, 1992. DATE ofhearing- 29th November 1992
KHALID PAUL KHAWAJA
Sh. Khalil-ur-Rehman for Appellants. Mian Muzaffar Hussain for
Respondent
MUHAMMAD YOUSAF and another--AppellantsvsNADIMUDDIN MALIK--Respondent
Law: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959.
Section: 13-A
(a) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)_----S. 13-A --- Relationship of landlord and tenant --- Proof --- Two tenants in occupation of shop in question --- Landlord serving notice on one of the tenants, that his father (previous landlord) had gifted shop in question to him and that he was the landlord --- Non-service of such notice to co-tenant --- Effect --- Tenant who was served with notice had admitted having received notice and stated that after receipt of such notice he and his brother i.e. co-tenant had contacted the new landlord and asked him to show registered deed on basis of which he was claiming ownership --- Such fact was sufficient to establish that both the tenants were aware of the notice and the change of ownership mentioned therein--� Separate notice to co-tenant was not necessary in circumstances. [p. 1041 AZafarul Haq v. Waris Iqbal and another PLD 1979 Lah. 793; Amanullah and others v. Muhammad Hafeez and others 1984 CLC 2126; Syed Azhar Imam Rizvi v. Mst. Salma Khatoon 1984 MLD 46; Syed Azhar Imam Rizvi v. Mst. Salma Khatoon 1985 SCMR 24; Maj. (Retd.) Muhammad Yousaf v. Mehraj-ud-Din and others 1986 SCMR 751; Syed Hamid Hussain v. Mst. Humaira Ghias 1986 CLC 1873 and Dr. Quraishul Mujtaba Oarni v. S. Usman Ali Kazmi 1992 CLC 2114 rel.~7,(b) West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)_---- S-13 --- Default in payment of rent---Proof --- Tenants being aware of 'the act that ownership of shop in question, had changed hands and despite notice to that effect had been depositing rent in the office of Rent Controller, in the name Of Previous landlord --- Such deposit would not be considered valid lunduf Or payment of rent --- Tenants had thus, committed default in payment of rent for which they had been rightly ordered to be evicted.JUDGMENT This is an appeal against the order dated 22-1-1991 whereby the learned Addtional District Judge, Lahore dismissed the appellants' appeal against the order dated 26-2-1990 by virtue of which the learned Rent Controller, Lahore had ordered their eviction from the shop in question. 2. , The relevant facts, in brief, are that on 4-1-1988 Nadeem-ud-Din Malik,…