ISRAR HUSSAIN vs IMTIAZ AHMAD SHEIKH Ss — 2024 CLC 486 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

ISRAR HUSSAIN VS IMTIAZ AHMAD SHEIKH Ss. 13, 15 & 19---Eviction of tenant---Default in payment of rent---Expiry of lease---Verbal extension in lease and deposit of additional security alleged by the tenant---Special Judge (Rent), inherent jurisdiction of---Scope---Application for the eviction of petitioner/tenant was allowed and appeal filed by him was dismissed---Contention of the petitioner /tenant was that respondent /landlord had not claimed eviction on the expiry of lease or default in payment of rent specifically, so eviction passed on said two counts was illegal---Validity---Lease agreement, in the present case, showed that amongst other grounds of its terms and conditions, the reasons on which the eviction could be solicited was the breach of terms and conditions of the rent agreement, and a request was made by the respondent /landlord before the Tribunal that the petitioner/ tenant be directed to handover the vacant possession of the rented premises---Relevant clause of the rent agreement showed that, the period of lease , from the date of commencement of tenancy, was 11 months which was renewable with mutual consent of the parties, and one of the other commitments made therein was to vacate the premises and deliver it to the landlord on the expiry of lease period which was obviously 11 months---The same (vacation on the expiry of lease ) was one of the obligations as provided under S. 13(1)(d) of the Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009 (Act, 2009) whereas S.15(a) of the Act, 2009 provided for the right of eviction on the expiry of lease while S.15(d) of the Act, 2009 entailed eviction of tenant due to violation of an obligation under S.13---Even otherwise, no receipt or document was produced on record by the petitioner / tenant in support of his plea of payment of additional security nor any written agreement of renewal of tenancy was adduced---Lease agreement was, admittedly, unregistered which automatically lapsed on 11 months---Creation of lease or renewal thereof for more than one year could not be accepted without a registered document which was not the case in the present case---Record revealed that the Appellate Court took note of the fact that while admitting the appeal for regular hearing, it was directed that the petitioner should deposit monthly rent with annual increase on or before 10th of each month regularly but the petitioner deposited the rent after 10th of each month which was evident from the receipts ,and which was not only a violation of the agreement of tenancy but also the order of the Appellate Court---Petitioner / tenant could not avoid the consequences of default committed in payment of rent and the ground of violation of the tenancy agreement as well---It was thus obvious that the question pertaining to payment of rent was only considered for the purposes of observing the violation of the order of the court, the terms of agreement of tenancy and also the violation of law---Objection raised by the petitioner was, therefore, devoid of any legal substance---Considering the facts as they emerged on record, where the expiry of lease was evident, the Special Judge (Rent) had the inherent jurisdiction to mould the relief according to altered circumstances in the larger interest of justice---Both the Courts below had rightly passed eviction orders against the petitioner/tenant---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

ISRAR HUSSAIN vs IMTIAZ AHMAD SHEIKH Ss — 2024 CLC 486 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 CLC