1985 PLP 193 (MLD)

Petitioner Mehraj Din who is tenant of the property in dispute is present accompanied by his son Muhammad Tufail. Respondent No.l is also present in person accompanied by his son Zahid Mumtaz.

2. The parties have agreed to arrive at a compromise in order to shorten the litigation and to resolve the dispute in amicable manner subject to conditions listed below:- , (i) that the respondent-landlord would permit the petitioner to remain in occupation of the premises in dispute for a period of two years commencing 1-6-1985 and will not carry out the execution proceedings upto 31-5-1987 subject to the petitioner giving an undertaking to this Court to peacefully hand over vacant possession of the property in dispute to the landlord on or before 31-5-1987. For this period of occupation and user, the petitioner agrees to pay to the landlord at the rate of Rs.600 per month; (ii) it is agreed that should the petitioner default in payment of amount at the rate of Rs.600 p.m. for occupation arid user, during the extended grace period, he will render himself liable to immediate eviction; (iii) that from January, 1986, the petitioner will start paying rent it the rate of Rs.600 p.m. to the respondent-landlord by sending money order before the 10th of each month as advance for that period. It may also be tendered in cash against a proper receipt; (iv) the petitioner also undertakes not to indulge in acts which may be injurious to the property in question during extended grace period; (v) the petitioner also states that he is in exclusive possession of the property in dispute and undertakes to this Court not to put in possession any other unauthorised person or sub-tenant or licensee into the property in dispute.

3. This compromise has been arrived at under the circumstances that the petitioner raised a compassionate plea that he has a large amount to collect from his clients in the market and in case he is not allowed to remain in the premises in dispute, he may lose lacs of rupees. The respondent-landlord has agreed to show indulgence to the petitioner on the terms enumerated above.

4. The petitioner has paid in Court a sum of Rs.3,600 to the respondent-landlord representing rent for six months user and occupation from today commencing 1st of June, 1985 for the concessional period as a licensee. The petitioner slates that he has already deposited advance rent upto the end of year 1985 with the Rent Controller, Gujranwala. The rent deposited by the petitioner with respect to the future period will be adjustable and given due allowance in so far as payment of Rs.600 per month is concerned for the period upto 31-5-1987. The payment of advance rent already deposited with the Rent Controller will be adjusted towards the last instalment before exit.

5. The petitioner gives an undertaking to this Court that he would peacefully vacate and hand over possession of the whole of the premises in dispute to the landlord on or before 31-5-1987. This is also endorsed by his son who is virtually running and managing the business of his father.

6. I have considered the compromise. It appears to be just and lawful and also advances public policy by shortening litigation. It is accordingly allowed. The writ petition as per consent is disposed of as a notice case in terms of the compromise in view of the course adopted by the parties, there shall be no order as to costs. H. B. T. Order accordingly.