1974 PLP 40 (SCMR)

Date of hearing : 12th October 1973. ANWARUL HAQ, J.‑This petition for special leave to appeal seeks to call in question the dismissal of the petitioner's second appeal by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court by his order dated the 6th of March 1973. The appeal had arisen out of ejectment proceedings brought against the petitioner by the respondent in his capacity as the transferee of the shop in dispute. The respondent had purchased the shop in open auction from the Settlement Department on 21‑5‑1960, which auction was confirmed on 27‑5‑1960. A Provisional Transfer Order was issued in favour of the respon dent on 21‑8‑1961. The statutory notice prescribed by section 30 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, regarding the transfer of the property and containing a demand for the payment of rent was issued by the respondent on the 13th of September 1961. Instead of paying rent to the respondent, the petitioner filed an application before the Rent Controller under section 4 of the West Pakistan Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, for the fixation of fair rent. It is stated that an interim order was made by the Rent Controller fixing the rent tentatively at Rs. 45 p.m., but the application itself was ultimately dismissed in default on 29‑5‑1962. The petitioner did not take any steps to have it restored. As the petitioner failed to pay rent to the respondent, the latter filed ejectment proceedings under section 13 of the Ordinance, and in those pro ceedings an order for the deposit of rent at the rate of Rs. 45 p.m. was Rent Controller on 31-3-1962 under section 13(6) of the Ordinance. The Rent Controller in the payment of rent and that the notice properly served, as required by section 30 of the Displaced Persons (Com pensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, and, therefore, the petitioner was liable to ejectment. An order to this effect was accordingly made by the Rent Controller on the 31st of January 1963. This order has been upheld in the first and second appeals by the learned District Judge of Sargodha and the Lahore High Court. Special leave to appeal is sought on the ground that the statutory notice served by the respondent was invalid in law, as the respondent had demanded excessive rent at the rate of Rs.100 p.m., whereas the previous rent of the shop was only Rs.13 p.m., and its fair rent was tentatively fixed by the Rent Controller at Rs.45 p.m. Another submission made by the learned counsel is that in any case the notice suffered from a legal infirmity as it was not sent acknowledgement due. Both the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner are entirely without merit. The receipt of the notice was admitted and no evidence was led to show that it was not sent acknowledgement due. In these circum stances, the Courts below were right in holding that the notice had been sent according to law. As regards the invalidity of the notice on account of the demand of excessive rent, it is sufficient to say that the transferee was entitled, under the proviso to subsection (1) of section 30 of the Act to demand rent at the rate of the latest municipal assessment, and this is precisely what he did. Even otherwise, it is clear, from provisions of section 30, that the statutory relationship of landlord and tenant created by section 30 of the Act is to be regulated by the ordinary law only after the expiry of a period of six years, or on the occurrence of certain conditions specified in the section itself, one of them being default in the payment of rent by the statutory tenant. The application made by the tenant for the fixation of fair rent, as against the specific provisions embodied in section 30 itself was therefore not maintainable, and the petitioner was under an obligation to pay rent at the rate of the latest municipal assessment. It is not disputed that the petitioner completely failed to attorn to the transferee even after he had served the prescribed notice on the petitioner. The petitioner was, therefore, clearly in default, and his ejectment was rightly ordered. We accordingly dismiss this petition. Leave refused.