YOUSAF SHAH THROUGH HIS BROTHER (REPRESENTED BY 9 LEGAL OTHERS) vs Haji GHULAM JAN KHAN
This petition for leave to appeal was filed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan challenging an order of the Peshawar High Court dated 20-9-1974, which dismissed the petitioner's Second Appeal and upheld the concurrent ejectment orders passed by the Rent Controller and the lower appellate authority on the ground of default in payment of rent. The petitioner contended that the landlord had refused to accept rent at the originally fixed rate and demanded an enhanced amount. The Supreme Court observed that concurrent findings of fact existed regarding the default, and it was conceded that no rent was paid or tendered despite service of a notice demanding arrears. The Court affirmed the established legal principle that a landlord's prior refusal to accept rent does not absolve the tenant of the ongoing obligation to pay or tender rent for subsequent months. Finding the petition both devoid of merit and time-barred by 56 days without satisfactory explanation, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition.
- Does a landlord's prior refusal to accept rent absolve the tenant from the continued obligation to pay or tender rent for subsequent months?
- Can a petition for leave to appeal be dismissed on the ground of limitation where no satisfactory explanation is provided for the delay?
ORDER
' MUHAMMAD AFZAL CHEEMA, J.-This petition is barred by 56 days. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the order of the learned Judge of the Peshawar High Court, dated 20-9-1974, whereby the order of his ejectment passed by the Rent Controller and upheld by the lower Appellate Authority was maintained, and the S. A.
0. Preferred by the petitioner was dismissed.
2. The order of ejectment was passed by the Rent Controller on 28-1-1971 on ground of default in payment of rent. The alleged default pertained to the period from 1961 to 1964. The position taken up by the petitioner seems to be that the respondent landlord was not prepared to accept the monthly rent of Rs, 5 originally fixed by the Custodian which he continued to remit by means of money orders, and demanded rent at the enhanced rate of Rs, 20 per mensem.
3. On the point of default a consistent finding of fact has been given by the Courts below. It was also conceded before us by the learned counsel that although notice Exh. P. W. 3/1 was served upon the petitioner in August 1969, calling upon him to pay up the arrears of rent yet no payment was made or tendered by his client. It is well settled that the mere refusal of the landlord to accept the rent tendered on an earlier occasion does not 4 absolve the tenant of his continued liability to pay or tender the same for each successive month.
4. The petition is not only devoid of merit but is also barred by 56 days. No satisfactory explanation has been offered for the condonation of the delay in filing the petition. It, therefore, merits dismissal even on ground of limitation and is accordingly dismissed.
Cited by 12 cases
- BASHIR AHMAD vs QAISAR MEHMOOD and others 2013 CLC 214
- ROSHAN. ALI and anothers vs THE STATE 2012 P Cr. L J 1361
- Mst. RAZIA SULTANA vs Mrs. MUHAMMAD HASAN KHAN and 9 others 1991 CLC 632
- SHER BANO Versus KHATIJA 1989 CLC 1227
- Mst. REHMAT BAI (deceased) through Legal Heirs vs Messrs ABID and others 1987 MLD 2818
- ABM and others vs HEER BAI 1987 CLC 692
- PIYARO vs DIN MUHAMMAD 1983 CLC 958
- GHULAM HUSSAIN MALIK vs GHULAM DASTGIR KHAN 1983 CLC 1520
- PHOOL MUHAMMAD vs THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE AND 2 1981 CLC 179
- MUHAMMAD BUX AND ANOTHER vs Mst. RAFIQUAN 1982 CLC 1919
- SEPARAS KHAN vs Sh. ABDUL KHALIQ AND 9 Other 1979 PLD Lahore 385
- MUHAMMAD SALFFM KHAN vs ZAMEER AHMAD KHOKHAR And ANOTHER 1997 CLC 1531