MUHAMMAD ALI vs Mst. HAMEEDA BEGUM
This matter involves a petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan concerning the interpretation of Section 14 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. The core legal question presented is whether the benefit of the summary eviction procedure provided under Section 14 is restricted exclusively to a full owner of the demised premises, or whether such relief is also available to a co-owner who falls within the specific categories mentioned in the statute, such as a widow, a minor whose parents are deceased, a salaried employee nearing retirement, or a person who has attained the age of 60 years. The Court determined that this issue constitutes a substantial question of law requiring authoritative consideration. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal, allowed the petition, and directed that the petitioner shall not be evicted from the premises pending the final decision of the appeal, subject to the continued deposit of rent. The Court also ordered that notice be issued to the Advocate-General of Sindh to assist in the determination of this legal question.
- Is the benefit of Section 14 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance 1979 restricted to a full owner of the demised premises?
- Can a co-owner who is a widow, minor, or retiree avail the summary eviction benefits under Section 14 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance 1979?
- Section 14, Sind Rented Premises Ordinance 1979
ORDER
1. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--The question for consideration, inter alia, in this case is whether for the purpose of availing the benefit of section 14 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 the applicant must be the full owner of the demised premises, or, in other words, such benefit can also be extended to a co-owner who may be a widow, a minor whose both parents are dead, or a salaried employee due to retire within six months, or a person who is due tai attain the age of 60 years, or has attained the age of 60 years.
2. This being a substantial question of law deserves consideration by this Court. Leave is granted and the petition is allowed. Security Rs.2,500.
3. Appeal will be heard in January 1984 on the present record. It is open to the parties to file additional documents, if any.
4. Petitioner shall not be evicted from the demised premises till appeal is decided provided he continues to deposit rent in Court in terms of the orders passed in the case.
5. We would like to hear learned Advocate-General Sind. Notice to issue to him.
Cited by 1 case
- ZULFIQAR AHMED MEHAR vs Syed JOHAR HUSSAIN KAZMI 1990 MLD 1860