SHAUKAT AND 2 OTHERS vs MAHARAJ GANESHPURI AND 8 Other
The petitioners, who are tenants of certain shops, challenged an interim order passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Karachi in a pending writ petition. The High Court had directed the respondent, Maharaj Ganeshpuri, to furnish security for the rental amount of the shops and submit monthly rental accounts to the Secretary of the Evacuee Trust Board, thereby authorizing the respondent to initiate proceedings for rent recovery. The petitioners contended that they were tenants under the Custodian and feared that the High Court's order would facilitate ejectment and recovery suits against them. The Supreme Court of Pakistan dismissed the petition, finding the petitioners' grievance premature and unsubstantiated. The Court held that as tenants, the petitioners were obligated to pay rent, and if they possessed valid legal objections regarding the respondent's entitlement to collect such rent, those objections could be raised and determined on their merits in any subsequent legal proceedings initiated against them. The Court affirmed that interim orders of this nature do not preclude tenants from asserting their legal rights in future litigation.
- Can tenants challenge an interim order in a writ petition to which they are not the primary parties?
- Does an interim order allowing a party to initiate rent recovery proceedings preclude tenants from raising legal defenses in subsequent litigation?
- Is a tenant's apprehension of future ejectment proceedings sufficient ground to challenge an interim order regarding rent collection?
1. SAJJAD AHMAD, J.-The petitioners are aggrieved by an interim order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Karachi, whereby in a pending writ petition, it has been directed that the writ petitioner before the High Court, namely, Mahara, Ganeshpuri, respondent No. 1 in this petition, should furnish security to the extent of Rs. 7,620, representing the rental of the shops, and submit an account to the Secretary, Evacuee Trust Board of the receipts of rent every month, after which he shall be entitled to take proceedings for the recovery of the rent from the tenants. The petitioners, who are tenants of some of the; shops in the disputed property, have challenged this order on the apprehension that this would lead to suits for recovery of rents and ejectment against them by the aforesaid respondent under the cover of the High Court's order. Their stand is that they are tenants under the Custodian and paying rent to him. We are unable to appreciate the grievance of the petitioners. As tenants, they have to pay rent of the property, but if they have any legal objection to urge against the entitlement of the respondent to recover rent from them, they can raise that objection in the proceedings that may be brought against them in this behalf, which will have to be determined on merits according to law.
2. This petition is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.