Mst. MUNEERA KALEEMUDDIN And 4 Others vs MUHAMMAD MAHMOOD ALAM
This matter concerns five petitions for leave to appeal filed by tenants against the dismissal of their appeals by the High Court, which had upheld the enhancement of rent for their respective flats. The core legal question is whether the Rent Controller, when determining rent enhancement under Section 8 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979, is required to consider all factors specified in clauses (a), (b), (c), and (d) of subsection (1) conjointly, and whether an increase of nearly ten times the original rent is exorbitant and legally unsustainable. The petitioners further challenged the evidentiary value of an admission made by one tenant regarding the prevailing rental rates in the locality, arguing it should not bind all tenants. The Supreme Court, noting the need to examine the interpretation of the statutory requirements for rent enhancement and the proper application of the factors listed in the Ordinance, granted leave to appeal to consider these issues. The Court also ordered that the existing stay orders remain in operation pending the final adjudication of the appeals.
- Must a Rent Controller consider all factors specified in clauses (a) to (d) of Section 8(1) of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979 conjointly when enhancing rent?
- Can an admission regarding rental rates made by one tenant be used as evidence against other tenants in the same property?
- Section 8, Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979
- Section 8(1), Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979
- Section 8(1)(a), Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979
- Section 8(1)(b), Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979
- Section 8(1)(c), Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979
- Section 8(1)(d), Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, C.J.---Leave to appeal has been sought in these five, petitions tiled by the tenants occupying different flats in the same property against the dismissal by the High Court of their appeals whereby the enhancement of the rent in each case under section 8 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance XVII of. 1979, was brought under challenge but without any success.
2. Learned counsel has inter alia contended that in some of the present cases the rent has been increased nearly 10 times. This, according to him, is exorbitant and as argued could not be upheld on the touchstone of any of the considerations specified in section 8. He, however, further contended that while enhancing the rent it was necessary for the learned Rent Controller to take into consideration all the elements in sub-clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d) of subsection (1) of section 8, together and, conjointly. In this behalf he has relied on an earlier leave granting order reported as Abdul Ghaffar and another v. Mst. Noor Jehan Malik (1988 SCMR 1410).
3. Regarding the admission made by one of the present petitioners regarding the rate of rent in the locality, learned counsel contended that this could not be treated as an admission and that too going against one tenant and not all of them, subject however to foregoing contention.
4. These and other questions raised in these petitions require examination. Leave to appeal is accordingly granted.
5. Security Rs.5,000 in each case.
6. The stay order already passed shall continue in operation.
Cited by 2 cases
- Mst. HAPEEZEN vs Rana ZAHEERUDDIN and another 1999 YLR 2214
- Messrs OLYMPIA SHIPPING AND WEAVING MILLS LTD. and anothers vs STATE 2001 SCMR 1103