Pakistan Case Law
1983 SCMR 773

MAJOR (RETD.) A. S. K. SAMAD vs LT: COL. (RETD.) A. HUSSAIN AND ANOTHER

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1983 SCMR 773
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No. K-286 of 1982 F. R. A. No. 253 of 1981
Date1982-11-07
Judge(s)Abdul Qadir Shaikh, S. A. Nusrat and Zaffar Hussain Mirza
Authored byAbdul Qadir Shaikh
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the Sind High Court, which upheld the Rent Controller's decision to strike off the petitioner's defence in ejectment proceedings and order eviction due to an alleged failure to deposit rent. The core legal question was whether the striking off of a defence for non-deposit of rent is mandatory or if technical compliance, such as depositing rent in earlier proceedings between the same parties, mitigates the default under the relevant rent control legislation. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, holding that the petitioner's argument regarding the technical nature of the default and the prior history of rent deposits warranted further judicial consideration. The Court allowed the petition, suspended the eviction order subject to the petitioner continuing to deposit rent, and directed that the appeal be heard on the existing record. The principle established is that where a tenant has a history of depositing rent in court in related proceedings, a failure to deposit in a specific case may be viewed as a technical default rather than a wilful violation justifying the extreme penalty of striking off the defence.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does a history of depositing rent in court in earlier proceedings between the same parties mitigate a failure to deposit rent in a subsequent case?
  • Is the striking off of a defence for non-deposit of rent under the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance 1979 an automatic consequence or can it be excused for technical reasons?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 16(2), Sind Rented Premises Ordinance 1979
ejectment proceedingsrent controlstriking off defencetechnical defaultleave to appealdeposit of rent

ORDER

1. ABDUL QADIR SHAIKH, J.-The Rent Controller, Karachi by the order dated 19th February, 1981 struck- off petitioner's defence in the ejectment proceedings filed by the respondents and directed him to hand over possession of the demised premises to the respondent landlords. Petitioner's plea that he was depositing rent in Court regularly in earlier proceeding between the parties, and thus there was no failure on his part to deposit rent in Court was not accepted. Petitioner's appeal to the Sind High Court was dismissed, and he now seeks leave to appeal.

2. Since it has been shown that petitioner was depositing rent in Court in earlier proceedings and the amount was being withdrawn by respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, at best, the failure on petitioner's part to deposit rent in Court in the case concerned was of technical nature and should not entail penalty under subsection (2) of section 16 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979.

3. The point raised deserves consideration. Leave is granted ' and ' the petition is allowed. Security Rs.

4. 1,000.

5. The appeal to be heard ors the present record at an early date It is open to the parties to file additional documents, if any.

6. The petitioner shall not be evicted from the demised premises till the appeal is decided, provided he continues to deposit rent in Court in the appropriate proceedings.

Cited by 4 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.