1575/2017 Const. P. Muhammad Akram Thr. M Anwer Khan (Petitioner) V/S Shri Mahant Baboo Lalgir Mahraj & Others (Respondent)
Sindh High Court
Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar
Order Date: 20-DEC-18
Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----Ss. 15, 18, 20 & 21---Ejectment of tenant---Change of ownership on the basis of decree of the Court---Denial of relationship of landlord and tenant by the tenant---Default in payment of rent---Expression "or by such other mode" in S. 18 of the Ordinance---Scope---Dispute of title or ownership---Determination of---Procedure---Landlord became owner of demised premises through decree of the Court and tenant was intimated with regard to change of ownership and was requested for payment of rent to the new landlord---Tenant denied the relationship of landlord and tenant---Eviction petition was allowed by the Rent Controller on the ground of default in payment of rent---Appellate Court remanded the matter to the Rent Controller with the direction to decide the same afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties and directed the civil Court to amend the decree passed in the civil suit---Contention of tenant was that decree of the Court did not create any title---Validity---Tenants were in possession on the demised premises as tenants and they were not claiming ownership---Notice for change of ownership of demised premises had been received by the tenants---Tenants were bound to tender rent to the new owner of the demised premises within 30 days from the moment they had received the intimation of transfer of ownership by sale, gift, inheritance "or by such other mode"---Notice from new owner to the tenant for change of ownership was enough---Tenants on receiving the said notice refused to tender rent to the new owner on the ground that the decree of Court did not create any title---Decree of Court could also be one of the "such other mode" for transfer of ownership of demised premises---Decree of Court was against previous landlord/owners who were party to the suit in which same was passed---Tenant had no right to question the title of landlord---Tenants on receiving notice of change of ownership were supposed to protect their right as tenant in the demised premises in their possession by tendering rent to the person who had sent them the notice---Tenants had failed to tender rent to the new owner of demised premises---Courts while exercising authority under the law had no jurisdiction to decide or even comment on the title/ownership of the property in possession of tenant---If issue of relationship of landlord and tenant was complex then it should be left for the Civil Court to decide the same---Appellate authority in the present case had remanded the matter to the Rent Controller with the direction to decide the issue of relationship between the tenant and new landlord by re-examining the issue of ownership/title of demised premises already decided by the Civil Court---Judgment of Civil Court could not be examined by the Rent Controller---Appellate Court had exercised powers not vested in it and order for modification/preparation of fresh decree and remand of the case was perverse and void---Impugned order passed by the Appellate Court was set aide and order for preparation of fresh decree and remand of rent case were declared null and void---Tenants were directed by the High Court to vacate the demised premises within thirty days---Constitutional petition was disposed of accordingly. Messrs Habib Bank Limited v. Sultan Ahmed and another 2001 SCMR 679 and Allahditta and others v. Member (Federal) Board of Revenue 2018 SCMR 1177 rel.Full judgment text for this case is not yet available on Pakistan Law Reports. Check the official Sindh High Court case law portal for the complete order.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.