2014 MLD 23 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Full text

MUHAMMAD ANWAR VS Mir RAFIQUE AHMED TALPUR 2006 SCMR 1068, PLD 2009 SC 71, Competency--Term , Constitutional petition--TERM , Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984--115 , Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979--15 , Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979--2 , Ss. 15, 2(f) & 2(j)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 115---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Application for ejectment of tenant---Competency---Bona fide personal need of landlord---Denial of relationship of landlord and tenant by the tenant---Contention of tenant was that he had purchased half share from the premises and ejectment petition was filed by only one of the legal heirs of the landlord---Ejectment petition was accepted concurrently---Validity---Rent agreement and deposit of security amount had been admitted by the tenant---Once relationship of landlord and tenant was established then during the existence of tenancy agreement, the tenant would be estopped from questioning the title of landlord---Question of title had no relevancy in rent proceedings---Existence of relationship between landlord and tenant had been proved through evidence---Alleged sale deed could not end the relationship of landlord and tenant---Tenant obtained possession of premises as a tenant and not as a purchaser---Once a tenant was always a tenant---Tenant could not be permitted to approbate, reprobate and raise self-contradictory pleas in violation of the terms and conditions of tenancy agreement---"Landlord" included all those persons who were co-owners of the premises---Any one of the co-owners could file ejectment petition in respect of rented premises jointly owned by them---Title of tenant in the premises could not be adjudicated upon by the Rent Controller in the eviction petition---Rent Controller could only assume jurisdiction when there existed relationship of landlord and tenant---Entitlement of landlord to receive rent could not be disputed after acknowledging the relationship of landlord and tenant---Tenant was bound to firstly hand over vacant possession to the landlord and thereafter contest his title---Tenant had committed wilful default in payment of rent---Concurrent judgments passed by the courts below being based upon well and un-exceptionable reasoning did not warrant interference by the High Court---Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances.