Case Details

Citation(s)
2003 SLG 694 2003 SLD 694 2003 SCMR 1662
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal Nos.302-K, 303-K and 304-K of 2001, decision dated: 2-08-2001
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, C.J., CH. MUHAMMAD ARIF AND MUNIR A. SHEIKH, JJ
A. Rahim Kazi, Advocate Supreme Court and Akhlaq A. Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents

ALTAF AHMED KHAN and anothers

VS

MUHAMMAD HAYAT and 2 others

Law:

Section:

Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)----- ----Ss. 15 & 18---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)-­Ejectment of tenant---Status of landlord---Agreement to sell. Execution of----Petitioner who was prospective buyer and had only agreement to sell executed in his favour, filed ejectment petition---Rent Controller as well as High Court declined to eject tenants on the ground that the -Petitioner was not landlord and requirements of S.18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, were not fulfilled---Validity---High Court had rightly found that the -Petitioner was only a prospective purchaser and, therefore, no relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the parties--­Supreme Court observed that the -Petitioner might file fresh ejectment petition subject to satisfaction of Rent Controller regarding the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties---Petition for leave to appeal was disposed of accordingly. JUDGMENT IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, C.J.---These petitions are directed against the consolidated judgment, dated 21-11-2000 passed by a learned Judge in Chambers of the High Court of Sindh, Circuit Bench at Hyderabad, in F.R.As. Nos.69, 70 and 71 of 1998. 2. Brief facts are that -Petitioner No.2 Haseeb Rasool and his father Choudhary Safdar were owners and landlord of the three premises constructed on Plots Nos.55, 56 and 58, Block No.B, Unit No.6, Shah Latifabad, Hyderabad and they had respectively inducted the -Respondents as tenants. The -Respondents were regularly paying rent to -Petitioner No.2. -Petitioner No. 1 Altaf Ahmed Khan appeared on the scene and served identical notices on all the -Respondents stating that he had entered into an agreement for purchase of the suit property and that the -Respondents being the tenants were required to pay the rent to him. Thereafter, -Petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 filed ejectment application against the -Respondents seeking their eviction on two grounds, namely, reconstruction of the building and default in payment of the rent. The learned Rent Controller/Second Senior Civil Judge, Hyderabad after framing necessary issues and examining the evidence led by the parties dismissed the rent…
🔒
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