2020 YLR 1932 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Full text

MUHAMMAD AZEEM VS Mst. RANI Ss. 15, 18 & 2(i)---Contract Act (IX of 1872), Ss. 196 & 197---eviction petition by attorney--- Maintainability--- Change of ownership of demised premises---Notice to the tenant---Default in payment of rent and utility charges---Bona fide personal need of landlord---Scope---Evasive denial by tenant---Effect---Ratification---Need of husband of landlady---Scope---eviction petition was accepted concurrently--- Validity---Landlady had not disowned the acts done/performed by her attorney---If eviction petition was filed by a person having no authority even then such defect could be ratified---Ejectment petition filed on behalf of attorney was not only competent but also maintainable---Evasive denials were no denials rather same could be construed as admission on the part of tenant---Tenant had failed to pay rent to the landlady through her attorney but he had deposited the same in the Court in the name of already deceased owner---Filing of eviction petition would amount to a notice under S.18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, despite that tenant had not paid rent to the landlady---Demised premises was required to the landlady for her personal use---Landlady was not prohibited to seek eviction of a tenant on the ground of personal need of her husband, which fell within the ambit of "personal need"---Tenant had committed default in payment of rent and electricity charges---No mis-reading or non-reading of evidence had been pointed out in the impugned orders passed by the Courts below---Impugned orders had been passed in accordance with law, in circumstances---Constitutional petition was dismissed accordingly.