THE MILITARY ESTATE OFFICER, MULTAN CANTT. AND Others vs Mirza
This matter concerns a petition for special leave to appeal against the concurrent findings of the Rent Controller, the District Judge, and the High Court, all of which upheld an ejectment order against the petitioners (tenants) regarding a bungalow in Rahimyar Khan. The Rent Controller had initially directed the tenants to deposit monthly rent by the 15th of the following month. Upon the tenants' failure to comply, their defense was struck off, and an ejectment order was issued. The tenants argued that the default in payment for November 1977 was not deliberate, attributing it to a clerical error where a cheque was sent to the landlord's incorrect address in Multan rather than Rahimyar Khan. The Supreme Court examined whether this negligence justified the ejectment. The Court held that the lower courts correctly determined the mistake was avoidable and demonstrated a lack of due care and caution. Finding no violation of legal principles in the lower courts' concurrent findings, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming that such negligence does not excuse a failure to comply with rent deposit orders.
- Does a clerical error in sending a rent cheque to the wrong address constitute a valid excuse for failing to comply with a court-ordered rent deposit schedule?
- Can a Rent Controller strike off a tenant's defense for failure to deposit rent by the specified deadline?
- Is a finding of negligence regarding rent payment by lower courts subject to interference in a petition for special leave to appeal?
ORDER
KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN, J.--The dispute in this case is regarding Bungalow No. 11, Business Men Colony, Model Town, Rahimyar Khan. This bungalow belongs to Mirza Muhammad Saleem Baig (hereinafter called the landlord) from whom the petitioners (hereinafter called the tenants) got it on rent. The landlord filed an application for ejectment of the tenants. In these proceedings the learned Rent Controller on 19-7-1977 directed them to deposit the future monthly rent regularly by the 15th of the month next following the one for which the rent is due. However, as that order was not complied with the learned Rent Controller struck off the defence and directed ejectment of the petitioners on 21-5-1978.
2. The petitioners filed an appeal which was dismissed by the learned District Judge on 18-9-1978 and their second appeal being S. A. O. No. 562/1978 also met the same fate and was dismissed by the High Court on 20-11-1979.
3. The petitioners have now come up in a petition for special leave to appeal against the same to this Court.
4. Learned counsel submitted that no doubt there had taken place a default in the tender or payment of rent for the month of November, 1977, which was ultimately remitted in February, 1978, instead of paying the same before 15th of December, 1977, but he contended that the default was not deliberate as it happened due to the despatch of the earlier cheque at a wrong address of the landlord in Multan, instead of sending it to Rahimyar Khan. All the Courts below have found that this mistake could have been easily avoided and as it involved a clear negligence and want of due care and caution therefore there was no justification to ignore it. Learned counsel could not point out violation of any principle of law applicable t cases or situations of this type.
5. The result is that this petition has no merit and is dismissed.
Cited by 2 cases
- ZEHRA BEGUM Versus PAKISTAN BURMA SHELL LTD. 1992 MLD 2494
- MEHMOOD BASHIR vs Mst.MOBINA BEGUM 1984 CLC 2620