2009 YLR 945 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Full text

PAK JUNAID FLOUR MILLS (PVT.) LTD. VS DARA FEROZ MIRZA S.17---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.12 (2) & O.IX, R.13---Ex parte decree, setting aside of----Service of process to tenant---Proof---Non-registration of tenancy agreement---Effect---Approbation and reprobation---Rent Controller had made all the required efforts towards service of process to tenant and notices were not only issued on rented premises but on the office of tenant as well---Service of process could not be effected on tenant, despite pasting of notices and publication, . therefore, Rent Controller proceeded ex parte and eviction order was passed--Tenant sought setting aside of ex parte eviction order but his application under S.12 (2) read with O.IX, R.13 C.P. C. was dismissed by Rent Controller---Plea raised by tenant was that agreement of tenancy relied upon by landlord was unregistered document which could not be relied upon and process was not served on tenant through modes prescribed under law---Validity---Tenant itself was signatory and beneficiary of agreement, through which it entered into the premises and followed terms and conditions contained therein, therefore, tenant was estopped under law to challenge its own deeds---Non-registration of agreement could not negate contract between parties while it might have effects towards monetary liability to fulfil deficiency towards payment of registration fee etc.---Such plea raised by tenant was nothing but approbation and reprobation and could not be entertained---Bailiff of Court collected information from employees in respect to concerned officials of tenant, which showed that bailiff approached officials of tenant and left some intimation in that respect, thus tenant was properly and legally served through all possible ways of service provided under law---High Court, in exercise of appellate jurisdiction, declined to interfere with eviction order passed by Rent Controller against tenant---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.