Case Details

Citation(s)
1991 SLG 1503 1991 SLD 1503 1991 SCMR 2039
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.17-Q of 1988, decision dated: 27-05-1991(Against the judgment and order of the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta, dated 12-8-1987 in F.A.O. No.95 of 1987)
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH AND ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, JJ

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

Khawaja MUHAMMAD RAFIQ

Haji ALLAH NOOR

Law:

Section:

West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)--S. 13---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Default in payment of rent---Findings of Courts below on question of default whereby tenant was deemed not to have committed default---Validity---Rent Controller had not given a definite finding whether rent had been paid or tendered by tenant to landlord--­Rent Controller had overlooked evidence produced by landlord and decided the case clearly on presumption thus, exercising discretion in spite of the fact that there was sufficient evidence produced by landlord to prove tenant's default--­High Court had also erred in confirming of Rent Controller---Tenant had absolutely failed to prove that rent was paid to landlord---Judgments of Courts below to the contrary were set aside and tenant's eviction was ordered from the premises in question. Abdul Aziz v. Abdul Ghani 1986 S C M R 1857, Tar Muhammad Janoo v. Taher Ali 1981 S C M R 93 and Abdul Rashid v. Saleh Muhammad 1980 SCMR 506 ref. JUDGMENT ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, J.---This appeal by leave of the Court is directed against the judgment of the High Court dated 12-8-1987. 2. The facts, in brief, are that the appellant brought an application for eviction of the respondent from the premises in question on the ground of default from January 1984. The eviction application was filed on 10-12-1984. The application was contested and it was averred that the respondent/tenant had already paid the rent in advance uptil June 1985 but no receipt had been issued to the respondent. An issue of default was framed by the Rent Controller. The application was dismissed by him. The High Court also dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. It was contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that it was the case of the respondent that the rent receipts had been issued regularly by the landlord. But in this case, the respondent has not produced any rent receipt to show that the rent was paid by him. He further submitted that the appellant in his deposition has stated that the respondent failed to pay the rent, therefore, the burden shifted to the respondent.…
🔒
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