GHULAM HAIDER and 3 others vs Haji ABDUL SHAKOOR
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the High Court of Balochistan, which overturned an ejectment order passed by a Rent Controller against a tenant. The Rent Controller had ordered the tenant's eviction due to default in rent payment. The High Court reversed this decision, reasoning that the default was for a short duration and that the arrears had subsequently been deposited in compliance with the Controller's order under the relevant rent legislation. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to determine whether the High Court was legally justified in condoning the delay in payment, which had originally triggered the ejectment, and to examine the application of the amended provisions of the Balochistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, particularly in circumstances where the respondent-tenant failed to admit liability for rent on the first date of hearing. The core legal question involves the scope of the High Court's discretion to condone rent defaults and the procedural requirements for invoking statutory protections against ejectment.
- Can the High Court condone a delay in rent payment that has already resulted in an ejectment order?
- Does the failure of a tenant to admit liability for rent on the first date of hearing affect the application of the Balochistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959?
- Section 13(6), Balochistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959
ORDER
1. ' FAZAL ILAHI KHAN, J.---Leave to appeal is prayed for by the petitioners against the judgment of the High Court of Balochistan dated 7-11-1993 in F.A.O. No, 73 of 1993.
2. ' Petitioners/landlords' ejectment application was allowed by the Controller of Rent against respondent/tenant from a shop on the ground of respondent having defaulted in payment of rent.
3. The learned High Court, however, set aside the order of ejectment on the ground that default was for short period and that the arrear of rent has been deposited in compliance with the order of Controller under section 13(6) of the Rent Restriction Ordinance. Leave is granted to consider; whether learned High Court was legally correct on facts of the case to condone delay which entailed ejectment on the grounds given above and for attracting the amended provision of the Balochistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, when the respondent did not admit his liability on the first date of hearing of the petition.