MUHAMMAD YOUNUS and another vs Mst. HAJIRA BI
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by the landlord against the judgment of the High Court, which had set aside the tenant's eviction order passed by the Rent Controller. The Rent Controller had ordered eviction on the grounds of default and nuisance. The core legal question concerned whether the tenant's conduct constituted actionable nuisance and whether the ground of default was validly established given the timing of the rent payment and the exercise of judicial discretion. The Supreme Court held that the High Court's appraisement of evidence regarding nuisance suffered from no legal infirmity and that, even assuming a default occurred, the circumstances warranted the exercise of discretion in favor of the tenant. Consequently, the petition for leave to appeal was refused. The key principle laid down is that findings of fact on the question of nuisance by the High Court will not be disturbed absent a material defect, and courts may exercise discretion in favor of tenants regarding technical defaults depending on the facts and circumstances.
- Whether the High Court's appraisement of evidence regarding the ground of nuisance in a rent dispute can be interfered with?
- Is a tenant entitled to the exercise of discretion in their favor regarding a technical default in the payment of rent under the circumstances of the case?
- Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the setting aside of an eviction order where findings of fact are unexceptionable?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--The landlord's side in a rented premises dispute had sought leave to appeal against the acceptance of respondent's First Rent Appeal by the High Court.
2. ' The respondent/tenant was ordered to be evicted by a learned Rent Controller on the grounds of default and nuisance. The High Court on facts found that it was not a case of nuisance. Regarding the issue of default it was held that the rent having been paid within sixty days of the default this ground was not available against the tenant. Accordingly the eviction order was set aside. Leave to appeal has now been sought.
3. Learned counsel has tried to argue on factual side that the conduct of the respondent amounted to actionable nuisance. We after hearing him on this point do not find any material defect in the appraisement of evidence by the High Court. The order in this behalf does not suffer from any infirmity, legal or otherwise.
4. ' On the question of default it might be possible in the facts of this case to hold that the rent should have been paid within 15 days of default and hence there was a default of over a month. But in that behalf the tenant, again in the facts and circumstances of this case, was entitled to exercise of discretion in his favour.
5. ' This petition, therefore, fails and thus leave to appeal is refused. 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.
Cited by 5 cases
- FORWARD TRADERS vs M.F.M.Y. INDUSTRIES LIMITED 1995 PLD Karachi 510
- CHIRAGH AHMED vs SHAUKAT IQBAL and 6 others 1995 CLC 602
- Miss ZOHRA MASUD vs AFTAB AHMED 1993 PLD Karachi 293
- RAZIA BEGUM Versus GHULAM MOINUDDIN CHISHTI 1994 CLC 1769
- JAMEEL SONS & COMPANY Versus MUHAMMAD ASLAM 1992 MLD 1021