2005 YLR 1106 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Full text

TANVIR RAJPUT VS RUKIYA DADA 1983 CLC 470, 1990 CLC 849, PLD 1966 SC 182, PLD 1985 Kar. 633, PLD 1985 Kar. 698, Constitution of Pakistan 1973--199 , Constitutional petition--TERM , Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979--15 , Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979--16 , --Ss.15 & 16---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Ejectment of tenant---Wilful default in monthly rent---Denial of relationship of landlord and tenant---Striking off defence---After the death of the original tenant, his two sons were in the possession of the premises who did not deposit the rent on the ground that there was no relationship of landlady and tenant between the parties---Rent Controller passed tentative rent order and directed the sons to deposit the arrears of rent and also future rent---Sons of the deceased tenant failed to comply with the tentative rent order, therefore, their defence was struck off by the Rent Controller---Evicition order passed by Rent Controller was maintained by Appellate Court---Plea raised by the sons was that there was no relationship of landlady and tenant between the parties and arrears of rent were to be deposited by all the legal heirs of the deceased tenant---Validity---Tenancy of the sons was not independent of the tenancy of their father, which was linked with and dependent upon it---Sons became tenants under the statute for being heirs of the deceased tenant in possession of demised premises at the time of his death and they had derived title to the tenancy from the deceased---On succeeding to the tenancy of the deceased, the sons succeeded to the default also and as such were bound to the default committed by their father---Rent Controller was competent to pass order for payment of arrears and also for deposit of the current and future rent---Rent Controller was competent to pass the order in respect of the arrears of future rent---High Court presumed that if the direction relating to the arrears for the period of tenancy of the deceased tenant was to be implemented against all the heirs of the deceased then also the other part of the order relating to the future rent was essentially to be complied with by the sons in possession of the premises---Non-compliance of that part of the order warranted the striking off defence of the sons---eviction orders passed by the Courts below did not suffer from any jurisdictional defect or legal infirmity and as such did not call for interference by High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction---Petition was dismissed in circumstances.