Case Details

Citation(s)
1997 SLG 658 1997 SLD 658 1997 CLC 623
Sindh High Court
First Rent Appeal No.42 of 1993, decision dated: 7th December,, 1994
ABDUL RAHIM KAZI
Kazi M. Atiq Siddiqui for Appellant. Raja Khan for
Respondent

ABDUL RASHEED KHAN

VS

MUHAMMAD SAEED SIDDIQUI

Law:

Section:

(a) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)-------S.15---Denial of relationship of landlord and tenant---Effect---Where tenant had defied right of landlord and had challenged relationship of landlord and tenant and such relationship stood proved, then no other course could be followed but ejectment of tenant had to be ordered ---Ejectment of tenant was rightly ordered in circumstances. (b) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S.15---Default in payment of rent---Security deposit by landlord ---Effect--­Tenant had deposited security with landlord---Tenancy agreement provided that no rent would be adjustable out of such security deposit---Such condition by itself excluded adjustment of arrears of rent against security deposit---Landlord, thus, could not have adjusted arrears of rent against security deposit---Default in payment of rent was established and tenant was liable to ejectment on that account also. JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment passed by learned Senior Civil Judge/Rent Controller, Hyderabad on 31-3-1993 in Rent Case No.46 of 1990 directing the ejectment of the appellant within 60 days from the property bearing No.G/259, Saeed Manzil, Hali Road, Hyderabad, hereinafter referred to as the "disputed premises". Briefly the facts relevant for the purposes of this appeal are that the present respondent had instituted the said rent case on the grounds of default in payment of rent and requirement for personal use as well as the appellant causing damage to the utility of the premises. The rent case was contested by the appellant. He had challenged the relationship of landlord and tenant. The case of the appellant is that he was inducted as tenant in the disputed premises by one Abdul Hadi, the brother of the present respondent, and that he used to pay the rent to him. His case is that the said Abdul Hadi had expired leaving behind one widow and a daughter and, therefore, the appellant was paying the rent to son of the present respondent on behalf of said Abdul Hadi who was the owner of the disputed premises. The appellant has further contended that he was not shown any document by the respondent if he was…
🔒
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