2013 SCMR 1497 SUPREME-COURT

Full text

SYMPHONY (PVT.) LTD. VS Haji FAZAL KARIM 1990 SCMR 647, Eviction of tenant--TERM , Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979--15 , Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979--18 , Transfer of Property Act 1882--5 , Ss. 18 & 15---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S. 5---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---eviction of tenant---Change of ownership---Default in payment of rent to new landlord---Present landlord claimed that he had purchased suit property from a company (former landlord) vide a conveyance deed dated 13-2-1997, whereafter he sent a notice to the tenant under S. 18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 requesting the tenant to pay the rent to him at the previous rate with effect from March 1997---Tenant contended that former landlord, which was a company, was officially dissolved on 4-12-1982, so how could the present landlord obtain conveyance deed from a dissolved company on 13-2-1997; that under S.5 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 only a living person, which included a company, could transfer property, and since in the present case suit property was transferred through a conveyance deed after dissolution of former landlord company, the conveyance deed was a void document---Rent Controller decided in favour of the present landlord and directed the tenant to vacate and hand over possession of suit property---Order of Rent Controller was upheld by First Appellate Court and High Court---Validity---Courts below took into consideration all aspects of the matter including evidence on record, registered conveyance deed, release deed, transfer order of the concerned society, mutation letter and Form P.T.I., and rightly came to the conclusion that present landlord on the basis of registered conveyance deed requested the tenant to tender future rent to him---Title of present landlord had not been questioned by any of the shareholders of the dissolved company---Till date tenant neither tendered rent to the present landlord nor deposited the same in court---Tenant had committed default in payment of rent and was liable to be ejected---Concurrent findings of courts below did not suffer from any illegality or infirmity---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed in circumstances.