Case Details

Citation(s)
1995 SLG 1139 1995 SLD 1139 1995 CLC 1357
Sindh High Court
First Rent Appeal No.245 of 1991, decision dated: 15-11-1994
ABDUI LATIF U. QURESHI, J

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

ABDUL MAJID KHAN

VS

NOOR MUHAMMAD MEHKARI --Respondent

Law:

Section:

(a) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)-------S. 15 (2) (vii)---Bona fide personal need of landlord---Premises could be acquired by landlord only for himself, spouse or his children---Sister's sons, grandmother and wife's brother, would not come under provisions of S.15(2) (vii) of the Ordinance. Farrukhnisa v. Safdar Ahmed and others PLD 1985 Kar. 639; Muhammad Ashraf and others v. Khawaja Saeedul Hasan 1986 MLD 1652; Agari Amir Ali v. Abdul Majid 1993 SCMR 67; Zainab v. Yousuf Ibrahim 1993 MLD 2382; Miss Zafar Fatima v. Salim Raza 1993 CLC 270; Shaikh Muhammad Iqbal v. Saira Bano 1993 CLC 1761; Mohiuddin Ansari v. Muhammad Arif Siddiqui 1991 CLC 72; Muhammad Ashraf and others v. Khawaja. Saeedul Hassan and others 1986 MLD 1652; Noor Muhammad v. Iqbal Ahmed 1985 CLC 1007;`Rajab Ali v. Darius B. Kandawalla and another PLD 1984 Kar. 14; Aftab Ahmed Saeed v. Kamaluddin 1982 MLD 1601 and Yaqoob Masih v. Louisa De Souza 1992 MLD 1240 ref. (b) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S.15(2)(iv)---Materially impairing value of utility of premises---Landlord alleged that tenant by installing telephone in the premises had impaired value and utility of premises-.-Telephone being necessity of life, installation thereof would not impair utility of premises, rather it would increase its utility. Shaikh Ejaz Ahmed for Appellant. Shabbar Rizvi for Respondent. Date of hearing: 1st November, 1994. JUDGMENT This is appeal against the order of the III Civil Judge and Rent Controller, Karachi, Central. 1. The facts leading to its appeal are that appellant filed ejectment application against the respondent on the ground of personal bona fide need, default in payment of water charges, and for impairing the value and utility of the premises. The application was dismissed, as such this appeal. 2. The appellant in his ejectment application has stated that his family consists of ten persons including himself his wife, two of his daughters, one son, one widow, sister, two sons of his widow sister, one grandmother and one brother of his wife. They are living in two-roomed house at Korangi. His present house is insufficient for such a large family. He wants 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