Case Details

Citation(s)
1996 SLG 579 1996 SLD 579 1996 CLC 356
Sindh High Court
First Rent Appeal No. 202 of 1993, decision dated: 29-08-1995
DR. GHOUS MUHAMMAD, J
Muhammad Jamil for Appellant. Khalid M. Ishaque for
Respondents

Messrs UNIVERSAL MEDICAL AND GENERAL STORE through Proprietor Nasir Baig

VS

Messrs KAZI & SONS and another

Law:

Section:

(a) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)-------S. 15 (2)(iv)---Sindh Public Property (Removal of Encroachment) Act (V of 1975), Preamble---Materially impairing value or utility of premises---Grievance of landlord was that tenant to whom only the shops without open space were rented out, had encroached upon land lying on back side of those shops and amalgamated that land with shops and that such act of tenant besides being unauthorised also had materially impaired value and utility of premises---Rent -Controller was competent to decide dispute regarding encroachment---If allegations made by - landlord against tenant were proved to be true, tenant would be liable to ejectment and Rent Controller would be within his jurisdiction to pass order to that effect---Provisions of removal of Encroachment Act, 1975, neither were relevant nor a bar to exercise of jurisdiction by Rent Controller in context of controversy before him.--­[Jurisdiction]. (b) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S. 15 (2) (iv)---Materially impairing value or utility of premises---Landlord who sought ejectment of tenant on ground that tenant had materially impaired value or utility of premises in question, earlier had filed ejectment application on same ground, but same was withdrawn by him unconditionally pursuant to a settlement arrived at between the parties---Fresh ejectment application was barred because earlier application wherein one of the grounds for ejectment was also encroachment and impairing value and utility of premises in question, was withdrawn by landlord---Withdrawal of claim by landlord as a result of compromise in earlier ejectment application which also had stipulated increase in monthly rent which tenant was also paying, would go a long way to prove that landlord had voluntarily and intentionally relinquished his right to seek ejectment of tenant on ground of encroachment or materially impairing value and utility of premises---Such an inference would also not be inapt as landlord in his cross-examination had shown his willingness to withdraw proceedings if tenant was agreed to enhance monthly rent of premises---Plea of waiver, thus was available to…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492