2010 PLP 1201 (YLR)

MUHAMMAD TASNIM, J.

Granted.

2. While hearing this application it was asked by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if he is ready to argue the main petition for admission or otherwise, the application will be disposed of in such a manner, to which he agrees to argue the main petition. The application (CMA No.934 of 2010) is granted for the reasons disclosed in the affidavit annexed with the application. Order dated 19-2-2010 is recalled and this petition is restored to its original position. This petition is directed against the order dated 6-1-2010 passed by learned IIIrd Rent Controller, Karachi Central in Rent case No.530 of 2009, whereby learned Rent Controller has disposed of the application under section 16(1) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 directing the petitioner to deposit the arrears of rent from November, 2007 till January, 2010 at the rate of Rs.10,000 per month for 27 months, which comes to Rs.2,70,

000. Facts as disclosed in the memo of petition are summarized as under:

That respondent No.1 is landlord/ owner of the premises/shop No.97, Group-V, Commercial Area, situated at Liaquatabad Township, Karachi having been purchased under registered instrument dated 16-7-2007. It is further stated that petitioner was sitting tenant in the aforesaid shop against the monthly rent of Rs.10,

000. It is further disclosed in the petition that landlord after becoming owner of the premises sent intimation to the present petitioner with regard to change of ownership of tenement in question. After receipt of the notice present petitioner approached the respondent No.1 and made payment of rent for September, 2007 and October, 2007, but thereafter stopped payment for monthly rent to the respondent No.1. In the circumstances the application under section 15 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 (hereinafter called as S.R.P.0) for seeking ejectment of the present petitioner on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent and on the ground of personal need. The petitioner contested the proceedings by filing his written statement. Along with the main application for ejectment under S.R.P.O the respondent No.1 also moved an application under section 16(1) of S.R.P.O. The present petitioner filed objection to such application. After hearing the parties the learned Rent Controller has passed tentative rent order dated 6-1-2010, which is quoted hereunder:-- "Since the opponent has denied the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties as well as rate of rent, therefore it would be just and proper to direct the opponent to deposit the arrears from November 2007 till January 2010 at the rate of Rs.10,000 per month for 27 months, which comes to Rs.2,70,000 be deposited within the period of two months from the date of this order. The opponent is also directed to deposit future rent at the rate of Rs.10,000 per month in this rent case on or before the 10th of each calendar month. However, the applicant will not be entitled to withdraw the rent amount till the disposal of present rent case. The application is disposed off accordingly, with no order as to cost." The petitioner being aggrieved with the above order has filed the present petition. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have examined the record with his assistance. Learned counsel has submitted that petitioner has filed suit No.587 of 2004 pending before learned Ist. Senior Civil Judge, Karachi Central for Cancellation of Documents and Permanent Injunction, whereby he has sought cancellation of sale deed dated 29-9-2001, hence learned Rent Controller should not have passed the order impugned in the petition. That record shows that the pending suit has no relevance with the present rent proceedings. The present proceedings are being contested by the present petitioner by filing his written statement and evidence of the parties is yet to be recorded. The order passed by the learned Rent Controller protects the interest of the present petitioner as the learned rent Controller while directing the petitioner to deposit the sum of Rs.2,70,000 being arrears of rent for 27 months in Court further directed the petitioner to deposit future monthly rent regularly in Court before the 10th of each calendar month. However it has been ordered that landlord shall not withdraw the rent amount till the disposal of the rent case. Since the rent case is still pending, likewise the suit of present petitioner is still pending and both the proceedings are to be decided on merits after recording of evidence of the parties. The learned Rent Controller while disposing of the main ejectment case shall also decide issue of ownership/landlordship of the tenement in question after considering the evidence on record. Thereafter petitioner shall get chance to challenge the findings of learned Rent Controller through appeal before the appellate Court. Hence no observation with regard to ownership of the tenement in question can be passed in these proceedings. It is open to the parties to raise all legal and factual pleas before the Courts where suit and rent case are pending and such objections shall be decided by the respective Courts in accordance with evidence on record and law. I have gone through the tentative rent order dated 6-1-2010 and find that same is in accordance with law and protects the interest of the present petitioner, and the same does not call for any interference under Article 199 of Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. In this view of the matter, the petition merits no consideration and the same is dismissed in limine, with no order as to costs. H.B.T. /M-44/K Petition dismissed.