2017 PLP 231 (YLRN)

ATIR MAHMOOD, J.

Brief facts of the case are that on 10.05.2011, respondent No.3- Parveen Akhtar (the respondent) filed a petition for eviction of the petitioner from Shop No.NE-269, Tipu Road, Rawalpindi. The ejectment petition was ultimately allowed by learned Special Judge (Rent), Rawalpindi vide judgment and decree dated 26.09.2012 along with the direction to the petitioner to handover possession of the demised property and also pay arrears of rent @ Rs.11,000/- from June, 2008 with 10% annual increase till vacation of the shop. The appeal preferred there against was dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Rawalpindi vide judgment and decree dated 02.02.2013. The respondent filed an execution petition which was executed and possession of the shop in question was handed over to the respondent. This writ petition has been filed against judgments and decrees of learned courts below to the extent of payment of arrears of rent.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner chiefly contends that there was a specific provision for determination of arrears of rent in the old statute, i.e. the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 but this provision does not exist in the prevailing law, i.e. the Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009 (hereinafter called "the Act, 2009"); that under the prevailing law, the learned Special Judge (Rent), Rawalpindi while passing the impugned judgment and decree dated 26.09.2012 could eject the petitioner from the rented premises but he could not determine the arrears of rent as no such provision exists in the Act, 2009. He asserts that the powers to determine the rent only vest with the civil court and not with the court of Special Judge (Rent).

3. On the contrary, learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently controverted the assertion of learned counsel for the petitioner by submitting that the learned Special Judge (Rent) had ample powers to determine the arrears of rent due against the petitioner being tenant in the demised property and this writ petition having no force merits dismissal.

4. I have heard the arguments put forth by learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the record made available before me.

5. The only point emerged from arguments of learned counsel for the parties is that whether or not learned Special Judge (Rent) has jurisdiction to determine the arrears of rent.

6. Section 24 of the Act, 2009 provides that in case an ejectment petition is filed, the Rent Tribunal, while granting leave to contest, will direct the tenant to deposit the rent due against him within a specified time and continue to deposit the same in future as well in accordance with the tenancy agreement or as may be directed by the Rent Tribunal. However, if there is any dispute between the parties regarding amount or rate of rent, the Rent Tribunal will tentatively determine the dispute and direct the tenant to deposit the rent accordingly. The Rent Tribunal may also direct the tenant to deposit the utility bills if any such amount is due against him. Needless to say that such order passed by learned Special Judge (Rent) is mandatory to be complied with by the tenant failing which he is liable to be ejected forthwith. According to section 25(5) of the Act, 2009, the Rent Tribunal shall record evidence of the parties and then after hearing both sides will pass a final order. The words 'final order' and "rent" have been defined in subsections (b) and (h) of section 2 of the Act, 2009 as under: (b) "final order" means a final order passed by a Rent Tribunal culminating the proceedings including an order in respect of adjustment of pagri, advance rent, security, arrears of rent, compensation or costs but shall not include an order passed in an execution proceedings." (h) "Rent" includes arrears of rent, a utility bill and any amount that may be payable by a tenant in relation to the tenancy; (Emphasis provided)

7. To further elaborate, under section 24 of the Act, 2009, ample powers have been given to the Rent Tribunal to direct the tenant, at the time of grant of leave to contest, to deposit the rent admitted between the parties and in case of dispute regarding quantum of rent in addition to payment of utility bills if due against the tenant. This power vested in the Rent Tribunal does not end here. The Rent Tribunal will then proceed with the matter and after recording evidence and hearing arguments of the parties will pass the final order and at that time, he will determine the arrears of rent while adjusting the tentative rent deposited or paid by the tenant, pagri, security, advance rent etc if any lying with the owner of the property. Even otherwise, if a court, forum or authority is given powers to deposit a certain amount tentatively, it does not appeal to a prudent mind that such authority will not finally determine the outstanding amount against the tenant after having adjusted the amount deposited with the court, paid or kept with the owner in shape of tentative rent, advance rent, pagri, security etc. at the time when such proceedings are culminated. If such power does not vest with it, it will not be possible for it to adjust the amount deposited on its orders. Therefore, contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that such powers were given in the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 under Section 13(6) but no such power is provided in the prevailing law, i.e. Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009 is without any foundation and I am not in acquiescence therewith. The provisions of sections 24 and 25 read with Section 2(b) & (h) of the Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009 are very much clear in this regard and under said provisions of law, the Special Judge (Rent) had ample powers to determine the arrears of rent as stated hereinbefore.

8. For what has been discussed in the preceding paragraphs, I am of the considered opinion that the prevailing statute, i.e. the Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009, fully empowers the Special Judge (Rent) to direct the tenant to pay the rent agreed and in case of dispute regarding quantum of rent, the tentative rent, utility bills at the time of initial stage of the ejectment petition and then to determine finally the rent outstanding against the tenant after adjusting the tentative rent deposited with the court or paid to the owner, pagri, security, advance rent, etc. if any lying with the owner. Therefore, this writ petition is without any substance. Dismissed. SL/M-156/L Petition dismissed.