2023 CLC 1817 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Full text

MUHAMMAD HAZIQ ALI KHAN VS IXth ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, HYDERABAD Ss.2(f), 2(j) & 15---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.9---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Ejectment of tenant---Landlord and tenant relationship, denial of---Effect---General jurisdiction of Civil Courts---Scope---Petitioners / landlords sought eviction of respondent / tenant from demised premises---Respondent / tenant denied relationship on the plea that he was owner of the premises---Rent Controller and Lower Appellate Court dismissed ejectment petition and appeal respectively filed by petitioners / landlords---Validity---Special jurisdiction under Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, could not exclude general jurisdiction of Civil Court under Specific Relief Act, 1877---When a tenant denied title of landlord, first he had to vacate the premises and contest the right before competent Court of law---If tenant himself was claimant and he objected title of owners, he could not put his own feet in another's shoes but in any case, he had to vacate rented premises---Judgments of courts below were against Ss. 2(f) & 2(j) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, which clearly stated that owner of property was landlord and person in possession was deemed as tenant---Judgments passed by two Courts below were outcome of misreading and non-reading of evidence---Petitioners / landlords were owners of property in question---Respondent / tenant who was occupying the subject property could not occupy it in any capacity other than as a tenant, as determined in civil suit between the parties---Respondent / tenant also filed a civil suit claiming that he had purchased the subject property but his plaint was rejected under O.VII, R.11, C.P.C.---High Court set aside judgments passed by Rent Controller and Lower Appellate Court dismissing application under S. 15 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, filed by petitioners/ landlords against respondent / tenant---High Court directed the respondent / tenant to vacate demised premises in his possession forthwith as sufficient time had already been given to him---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.