2011 PLP 487 (CLC)

RAUF AHMAD SHEIKH, J.

It is contended that Mst. Farooq Sultan Siddique respondent No.1 has died and as such the power of attorney in favour of Muhammad Idrees has ceased to exist and the proceedings before the learned Rent Controller stood abated so the ejectment order dated 3-3-2010 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Rawalpindi and orders dated 12-6-2010 and 2-11-2010 passed by learned ADJ, Rawalpindi, are illegal, void ab inito, without lawful authority and ineffective qua their rights.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners today submittedC.M.3085 of 2010 for permission to submit photostat copy of the postal envelope and copy of a letter purportedly addressed by Khalid Pervaiz, whereby he had appreciated the sincere feelings of the petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 expressed over demise of his mother. It is urged that the contention of the petitioners regarding demise of Mst. Farooq Sultan Siddique stood established and 'as such the power of A attorney in favour of Muhammad Idrees ceased to exist so proceedings recorded by the learned Rent Controller and the learned ADJ are vitiated in toto.

3. The record reveals that the respondents filed an ejectment petition through Muhammad Idrees son of Ahmad Din as their attorney against the petitioners. The learned Rent Controller directed the petitioners vide order dated 3-12-2009 to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,73,000 as arrears of rent till 4-1-2010 and also monthly rent at the rate of Rs.6,500 per month before 15th of each month. The petitioners did not deposit the rent and moved an application contending therein that respondent No.1 had died so the power of attorney in favour of Muhammad Idrees had ceased to exist and as such respondent No.1 be called to appear in person. The learned Rent Controller due to non-compliances of the order under section 13(6) of the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, struck off the defence of the petitioners and passed an order for their ejectment. The petitioners assailed this order before the learned ADJ but 'did not deposit the rent in pursuance of the order of the learned ADJ and did not appear in the Court on 12-6-2010 so their appeal was dismissed. They moved the application for restoration of the same, which was dismissed on 2-11-2010 due to delay of 133 days in filing the application and non-furnishing of plausible explanation for non-appearance.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended that the whole proceedings are vitiated in view of the copy of the letter sent by Khaiid Pervaiz through which the death of one of the landlords i.e., respondent No. 1 is established. It is however, admitted that till today no rent has been paid or deposited in compliance of the order of the learned Rent Controller. The petitioners were asked to submit the copy of the death certificate; which has not been submitted. The authenticity of the letter, which does not contain the date of death, is not established. Even otherwise the proceedings before the learned Rent Controller did not abate due to demise of one of the landlords' as her sons and daughters were already party to the proceedings. The petitioners are occupying the disputed premises without payment of rent for a period of more than four years. The learned Rent Controller and learned ADJ did not commit any illegality or irregularity. No ground is available to interfere in the impugned orders in exercise of the constitutional jurisdiction. The writ petition is without merits and the same is dismissed in limine. M.U.Y./N-115/L Petition dismissed.