KARACHI PROPERTIES INVESTMENT COMPANY (PVT.) LTD. vs HABIB CARPETS (PVT — 2024 SCMR 1354 SUPREME-COURT

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

KARACHI PROPERTIES INVESTMENT COMPANY (PVT.) LTD. VS HABIB CARPETS (PVT.) LIMITED S. 2(i)---Expressions 'rent' and 'such other charges which are payable by the tenant' used in section 2(i) of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979---Scope---Monthly maintenance charges not mentioned in the lease deed---In the present case there was no express or implied covenant incorporated in the agreement which may impose any obligation on the tenant/respondent for the payment of the alleged monthly maintenance charges---Counsel for the landlord company/ appellant could not satisfy as to how, without an express condition in the tenancy lease or agreement, the appellant could assert the default on account of non-payment of maintenance charges---No doubt, the definition of rent includes water charges, electricity charges, and such other charges which are payable by the tenant but are unpaid---But in the present case the foundation of the appellant's ejectment case was on account of default in the payment of maintenance charges taking into consideration the residue fragment of the definition of rent i.e., "and such other charges which are payable by the tenant but are unpaid"---Before invoking any default in the aforesaid residuary segment, there must be something agreed in writing between the landlord and tenant---Had the condition of making payment for any monthly maintenance charges been jotted down and agreed between the parties, then of course, that could be considered a binding agreement and the tenant/ respondent could not get rid of it without payment and obviously, in the event of default, that cause of action would have been available to the appellant to seek ejectment on the ground of default including the non-payment of maintenance charges; but in the present case the situation was altogether different as no such condition was ever pressed nor incorporated in any lease/tenancy agreement---Expression "such other charges which are payable by the tenant" would not come into field automatically or mechanically to rescue the landlord unless and until the condition of making payment for such charges was itemized in the agreement with proper details---High Court rightly dismissed the ejectment petition---Appeal was dismissed.

KARACHI PROPERTIES INVESTMENT COMPANY (PVT.) LTD. vs HABIB CARPETS (PVT — 2024 SCMR 1354 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 SCMR