| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1990 SLG 736 1990 SLD 736 1990 SCMR 647 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal No.120-K and 121-K of 1989, decision dated: 28-02-1989.
ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, S.A.NUSRAT, ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA AND NAIMUDDIN, JJ
M. A. I. Qarni, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Mirza Abdul Rashid, Advocate Supreme Court and M.Hassan, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent.
Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal No.120-K and 121-K of 1989, decision dated: 28-02-1989.
ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, S.A.NUSRAT, ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA AND NAIMUDDIN, JJ
M. A. I. Qarni, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Mirza Abdul Rashid, Advocate Supreme Court and M.Hassan, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent.
KASSIM and anothers
VS
S. RAHIM SHAH
Law:
Section:
Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)------S.15---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Eviction application--Landlord acquired right of ownership in property through sale-deed-Until saledeed was cancelled and was out of field, landlord could claim to have stepped into shoes of previous owner, entitled to recover the rent---Even if agreement of sale was executed by previous owner in favour of tenant on a prior date before registered sale-deed, the registered sale-deed would have precedence over the prior unregistered deed of agreement---Position would remain same till such time Civil Court passed decree against landlord in suit for specific performance pending in respect of property---Landlord, held, was entitled to recover rent--Decision of High Court maintaining eviction order was not interfered with. Province of Punjab v. Mufti Abdul Ghani P L D 1985 S C 1 ref. ORDER ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA, J.---In these two petitions for Leave to appeal the facts are almost identical and as identical questions of law arise for determination, they are being disposed of by this common order. Kassim son of Arab, the petitioner in Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.120-K of 1989 is the father and Iqbal, the petitioner in Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.121-K of 1989 is his son. According to the respondent they were both tenants in the respective premises in their occupation, of the previous owner Budha son of Soomar. Syed Rahim Shah, the respondent herein, claiming to have purchased the building comprising the premises in the occupation of the petitioners, sought their ejectment on the ground of non-payment of rent. The petitioners contested the eviction application and their defence was that Kassirn himself had purchased the property from the previous owner earlier and thereby became the owner of the premises in the two petitions, with the result that they were not the tenants of the respondent. The evidence was led by the parties before the Rent Controller who held that the respondent was the owner and landlord of the premises, and therefore, as the petitioners had committed default in the payment of rent, he ordered their eviction. The case of the…
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