2014 PLP 1084 (MLD)

SHOAIB SAEED, J.

This writ petition is directed against the impugned orders dated 13-5-2013 passed by the Civil Judge/Rent Tribunal Shakargarh and 4-7-2013 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Shakargarh.

2. Brief facts of the case are that respondents Nos.1 to 8 filed an eviction petition on 27-3-2013 against the petitioner with reference to a shop situated in Abid Market Shakargarh. The ejectment proceedings were filed on the ground of default for the months of October of 2012 till 31-3-2013. The shop carried a monthly rental of Rs.4000. Petitioner filed an application for grant of permission to defend the ejectment petition claiming therein that he was not defaulter in the payment of rent and it was a practice that rent was not collected regularly, but after a period of three/four months. It was also claimed that the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs.24,000 as rent for the relevant period.

3. It was contended by the learned counsel that petitioner was not a defaulter as the rent for defaulted months stood deposited. Admittedly, ejectment petition was instituted on 27-3-2013 whereas, rent for the relevant months was deposited on 30-3-2013. It was also contended that the attorney who collected rent on behalf of the respondent/landlord refused to receive the rent, perforce after obtaining permission from the rent tribunal, rent for the defaulted months stood paid forthwith.

4. Heard. Record perused.

5. Admittedly ejectment petition was filed on 27-3-2013 and rent deposited on 30-3-2013 after institution of the ejectment petition. Section 7 of the Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009 lays a procedure in respect of payment of rent which is as under:-- Payment of rent.- . (1) (2) If the date of payment is not mentioned in the tenancy agreement, a tenant shall pay or tender the rent not later than tenth day of the following month. (3) If the mode of payment is not mentioned in the tenancy agreement, a tenant shall pay or tender the rent to the landlord through money order or deposit in the bank account of the landlord. Apparently the petitioner neither followed the terms of tenancy agreement nor the provisions of section 7(2) and (3) of the Act. Payment of accumulated rent by the petitioner/tenant cannot be considered a proper payment as held in a case reported as Messrs Mehran Distributors through proprietor and 2 others v. United Bank Limited through Engineering Division, Karachi and 2 others (2009 YLR 1024 (Karachi). Though petitioner deposited the rent for the defaulted period under section 20(2) of the Act yet he cannot take refuge by mere deposit of rent for the defaulted months nor can such a deposit cause prejudice to the rights of the petitioner/landlord. On refusal of the petitioner or his agent to collect rent, petitioner should have made a tender or deposited rent after seeking permission from the court. Had the procedure as laid by section 7 of the Act supra, been followed petitioner would have escaped the wrath of being a wilful defaulter. As is evident from record no such steps were taken in accordance with law.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any illegality, irregularity or infirmity in the orders passed by the two courts below. This writ petition being devoid of any force is dismissed in limine.

7. However, petitioner is directed to handover the vacant possession of the shop to the respondent/landlord within a period of 45 days from passing of the order. Meanwhile petitioner shall keep paying rent for the relevant period to the respondent/landlord. A copy of this order shall be sent to the learned Rent Tribunal concerned for its compliance. AG/M-226/L Petition dismissed.