Citation Name: 2025 YLR 125 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Aslam vs United Bank Ltd

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

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 125 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Aslam VS United Bank Ltd. S.15---Eviction petitions---Default in payment of rent---Subletting without consent of bank/landlord---Eviction petitions were dismissed by the Rent Tribunal, against which appeals were preferred, which were accepted on the ground of default only as the ground of subletting the shops was withdrawn by the landlord---Contentions of the petitioners/tenants was that the attorney, who had filed eviction petition, appeared in the court to give evidence without any authority and that the ground of default remained unproved, thus, Appellate Court could not have passed the eviction orders---Validity---Landlord being a company was required to be represented by some of its officials having been conferred due authority in clear terms, which requirement was fulfilled by way of filing of the power of attorney (PoA), thus, no further document was required to confirm authority of the attorney to represent the landlord in the Court proceedings---Landlord representative by submitting a copy of PoA, not objected to by the other side, had showed his authority, which was sufficient evidence to satisfy the requirement of adequate representation of the landlord in the Court of law---Proceedings before the Rent Controller were quasi judicial in nature and technicality of any nature frustrating the aim and object of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, (SRPA) could not be allowed to prevail---PoA clearly stated that all the powers necessary to represent the landlord were bestowed upon the attorney to appear and act on behalf the landlord in the proceedings before the Rent Controller, thus, no further evidence on the point was required, nor on any technicality the evidence of the attorney could be discarded---Practice of paying rent in a lump sum did not override the terms of the tenancy agreement or the purpose of the SRPO---Precedent of how rent was paid in the past between the parties did not absolve the tenants from their obligation to pay monthly rent in advance as per the agreement---Landlord had the right to seek monthly rent payments in advance as agreed between the parties---High Court found no evidence that the landlord fraudulently created a ground of default in its favour by delaying rent payments of the tenants---Constitutional petitions were dismissed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2025 YLR 125 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Aslam vs United Bank Ltd — 2025 YLR 125 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR