Pakistan Case Law
1989 SCMR 515

Messrs RABKA PEST CONTROL LIMITED vs Mrs. MAHMOODA KHALIL

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1989 SCMR 515
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No,428-K of 1988
Date1988-10-23
Judge(s)Saad Saood Jan and Ali Hussain Qazilbash
Authored bySaad Saood Jan
ResultLeave to appeal refused
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by a tenant against the concurrent findings of the Rent Controller and the High Court, which ordered the ejectment of the petitioner from a house situated in Sind Muslim Co-operative Society, Karachi, on the ground of default in the payment of rent. The core legal question centered upon whether the agreed monthly rent was Rs. 2,500 or Rs. 1,500, which determined the issue of default. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the concurrent finding of fact by the lower forums fixing the rent at Rs. 2,500 per month suffered from no legal infirmity warranting interference. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, affirming the ejectment order. The key principle laid down is that the Supreme Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact regarding the rate of rent and default unless such findings are shown to suffer from a legal infirmity.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with concurrent findings of fact regarding the rate of rent?
  • Does a failure to pay rent at the agreed rate constitute default warranting ejectment?
ejectmentdefault in payment of rentconcurrent findingsleave to appealtenantrent controller

ORDER

' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The petitioner is a tenant under the respondent in a house situate in Sind Muslim Co-operative Society, Karachi. On an application made by the respondent a Rent Controller at Karachi has directed its ejectment on the ground of default in the payment of rent. The petitioner filed an appeal before the High Court but it failed. It now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.

2. The dispute in this petition centres mainly round the controversy whether the rent agreed upon between the parties was Rs,2,500 or Rs,1,500 per month. It is not disputed that if the rent was taken to be Rs,2,500 the petitioner would be a defaulter. Now, there is a finding of the Rent Controller that the rent fixed was Rs,2,500. The High Court did not interfere with this finding. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner we are not persuaded that the said finding suffers from any infirmity. The petition is dismissed.

Cited by 1 case

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