Mst. FATIMUNNISA and others vs Mrs. ZUBAIDA
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the High Court of Sindh, which had set aside an eviction order passed by a Rent Controller. The Rent Controller had originally ordered the eviction of the respondent due to a failure to deposit rent arrears by the specified deadline of 10-11-1981, as directed by an earlier order dated 28-10-1981. The respondent appealed this eviction, arguing that the delay in depositing the rent was unintentional and caused by the respondent's counsel's absence from court due to illness on the date the order was passed, a claim supported by a medical certificate. The core legal question was whether the High Court properly exercised its discretion in condoning the delay in the deposit of rent. The Supreme Court held that the High Court acted within its lawful discretionary jurisdiction in condoning the delay. Consequently, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court's decision and dismissed the petition in limine, affirming the principle that appellate courts possess the discretion to condone procedural delays where sufficient cause is shown.
- Can an appellate court condone a delay in the deposit of rent arrears if the failure to deposit was due to counsel's illness?
- Is the Supreme Court inclined to interfere with the discretionary exercise of jurisdiction by the High Court regarding procedural delays in rent matters?
ORDER
1. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.---The Rent Controller, Karachi by the order dated 26-5.1982 directed respondent's eviction from demised premises on the ground that she had failed to deposit arrears of rent in Court by 10-11-1981 in terms of the earlier order dated 28-10-1981 passed by him. On appeal by respondent, a learned Judge of Sind High Court set aside the order of the Rent Controller, accepting the plea raised by learned counsel for the respondent that the delay in the deposit of rent in Court was due to the reason that he was not aware of the order dated 28-10-1981 as he had failed to attend the Court that day due to illness. He produced a medical certificate in support of his assertion that he was ill on 28-10-1981.
2. ' Since we find that the High Court has condoned the delay in the deposit of rent by respondent in the lawful exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction, this is not a fit case for interference by this Court.
3. ' The petition is dismissed in limine.