Pakistan Case Law
1988 SCMR 1872

FATIMA Versus ABDUL WAHID

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1988 SCMR 1872
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.8‑Q of 1988
Date1988-05-29
Judge(s)S.A.Nusrat and Zaffar Hussain Mirza
Authored byS.A. Nusrat
ResultLeave granted

ORDER

S.A. NUSRAT, J .‑‑The respondents applied for the eviction of the petitioners from the disputed land alleging that the said premises were initially let out principally for the purpose of running a Fuel Stall, but subsequently late Mst. Mooro, the predecessor‑in‑interest of petitioners Nos.1 and 2, had sublet a part thereof to petitioner No.3 without his consent. It was further alleged that the predecessor in‑interest of petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 , had also committed default in payment of rent from August 1967 to April 1978. Certain other pleas were also raised. On the pleadings of the parties, a preliminary issue was framed by the Rent Controller as to whether there existed relationship of landlord and tenant between the respondents and petitioner No.1. Apart from oral evidence, reliance was placed by the first respondent on the rent deeds dated 8‑10‑1936 and 11‑12‑1939, allegedly executed by late Noor Din. On the basis of the evidence brought on the record, the learned Rent Controller came to hold that the application for eviction was not competent as the land in dispute did not fall within the meaning of "rented land" as defined in clause (f), section 2 of the Rent Ordinance. The rent application was accordingly dismissed. However; on appeal of the respondents, the order of the Rent Controller was set aside as per impugned judgment and the petitioners were directed to hand over the vacant possession of the disputed land to the respondents.

2. In allowing the appeal, the learned High Court placed reliance on the two lease agreements dated 8‑10‑1936 and 11‑12‑1939 and came to hold that the disputed premises fell within the definition of "rented land".

3. On going through the impugned judgment and the two lease agreements relied upon by the learned High Court we find that the question whether the decision of the learned High Court is based on correct interpretation of the two documents, needs consideration. Leave) is accordingly granted. Security Rs.1,000.

4. The petitioners will not be evicted from the disputed land till the disposal of the appeal.

M.I./F‑67/S Leave granted.

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