NASIM AHMAD vs SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE/RENT CONTROLLER No. 1, KARACHI AND

ORDER

1. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.-This petition concerns interpretation of section 16 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, which reads as follows :- "16. Arrears of rent.-(1) Where a case for eviction of the tenant has been filed, the Controller shall, on application by the landlord and after such summary inquiry as he deems fit to make, determine the arrears of the rent due and order the tenant to deposit the same within such period as the Controller may fix in this behalf and further direct the tenant to deposit monthly rent regularly on or before the tenth of every month, until final disposal of the case.

(2) Where the tenant has failed to deposit tie arrears of rent or to pay monthly rent under subsection (1), his defence shall be struck off and the landlord shall be put into possession of the premises within such period as may be specified by the Controller in the order made in this behalf,

(3) Where the rent has been deposited under this section, it shall, subject to such order as the Controller may make in this behalf, be paid to the landlord at the conclusion of the case or on such earlier date as may be specified by the Controller."

2. It is argued that the language of this section is materially different from that of section 13(6) of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordi--nance, 1959, in respect of the determination of the amount of rent to be deposited by the tenant during the pendency of the ejectment proceedings, in that, by the provisions of the latter Ordinance, the Rent Controller required to determine the amount of rent only on tentative basis, whereas under the provisions of the former Ordinance, he is required to determine the same finally as there is no power of adjustment of the amount of rent after the conclusion of the proceedings.

3. On analysis of the language employed in the respective provisions and also the other provisions of the Ordinance, the High Court has taken the view that the order passed under section 16 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 regarding the amount of rent payable by the tenant is also of tentative nature as the controversy regarding the quantum of rent is to be finally decided, alongwith the other questions, under section 19 of the Ordinance. The view taken by the High Court appears to be persuasive, but since the question raised is of general importance likely to affect large number of cases, it is necessary that an authoritative decision be given by this Court. We, therefore, grant special leave to appeal. Security for costs is fixed at Rs. 1,000.

4. We feel that it will not be proper to stay the operation of the order of the Rent Controller directing the petitioner to deposit the arrears of rent and the current rent. The request for stay is, therefore, rejected.