55/2019 R.A (Civil Revision) Muhammad Tobria S/o Ismail (Applicant) V/S The Board of Trustee KPT and others (Respondent)

55/2019 R.A (Civil Revision) Muhammad Tobria S/o Ismail (Applicant) V/S The Board of Trustee KPT and others (Respondent) Sindh High Court

Bench: Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) Order Date: 13-APR-21

- The licences on which respondents were relying were expired somewhere in 2013. After the expiry of the alleged licences the Karachi Port Trust started receiving amount as being lease money and a period of lease was also disclosed in the challans issued by Karachi Port Trust to applicants though separately describing them as licensee as well. - In this primary examination perhaps the respondents have not demonstrated to have passed the criteria and test to adjudge them (applicants) as licencees. Since the rental receipts were issued for a lease period, as available on record, therefore, notice under section 87 of the KPT Act for the eviction cannot be read to have been issued in pursuance of the aforesaid Act as a lessee cannot be evicted without due process of law. Hence, such action is not deemed to have been taken or purported to have been taken under the ibid Act. - When an action was not deemed to have been taken under the Act, the barring provision of Section 87 would not apply and plaint in this regard for a colourable exercise of powers by official of KPT cannot be rejected under order VII rule 11 CPC. It requires a trial as to whether action was in accordance with law or otherwise. The appeal preferred by the applicants met the same fate as it was dismissed. - I am of the firm view that the issue of notice of eviction to an occupant of the nature as described above is not warranted under the law and on such threat of eviction he cannot wait for a period mentioned in the barring section i.e. Section 87 of KPT Act and is not covered by any of the provisions of Act when status of applicants is adjudged as lessee in the last challan issued. It needs trial for a conclusive determination. When the applicants claimed to have been in occupation as lessee by virtue of challan issued to them the status of licencee was not carried forward and altered to a status of lessee by virtue of such challan and the descriptions provided therein. This is at least tentative view which should have been formed