Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: Messrs KASHMIR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VS Respondent: NOOR HUSSAINHonorable Justice Saleem AkhlarHassin Inamullah,Akbar Khan Ghori
1988 M L D 600
1988 M L D 600
[Karachi]
Before Saleem Akhlar, J
Messrs KASHMIR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION‑‑Appellant
versus
NOOR HUSSAIN and 3 others‑‑Respondents.
First Rent Appeal No. 11 of 1987, heard on 24th April, 1988.
Sind Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)‑‑
‑‑‑S. 16(2)‑‑Non‑compliance of tentative rent order‑‑Striking off defence‑‑Tenant contended that he had fully complied with tentative rent order as he had beer regularly depositing rent through Miscellaneous Application without committed any default in that respect‑‑Parties agreeing that in view of case reported as 198 S(MR 1013 no default was committed by tenant‑‑Append of tenant against order under S. 16(2) of Ordinance was allowed by consent of parties and impugned order of Rent Controller was set aside‑‑Case was remanded to Rent Controller for further proceedings.
Hassin Inamullah for Appellant.
Akbar Khan Ghori for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 24th April, 1988.
JUDGMENT
The stay application has been fixed for hearing, but with the consent of both the parties the main appeal has been heard. The appellant has challenged the order passed by the learned Controller under section 16(2) of Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, on the ground that order for deposit of rent was complied with. The defence taken was that the rent was being regularly deposited in Miscellaneous Rent Application No. 1104/74 and no default in compliance of that order has been made. However, the ejectment order was granted treating it to be a default. Both the learned counsel agree that in view of Maj. Rtd. A.S.K. Samad v. Lt. Col. A Hussain and another 1987 SCMR 1013 no default has been committed by the appellant. By consent the appeal is allowed. Impugned order of the Controller is set aside. The inter locutory application is also dismissed. Now the case will be remanded to the Controller for further proceedings in the matter.
H.B.T./K‑100/K
Case remanded.