1986 PLP 1973 (CLC)

and another‑‑Respondents First Rent Appeal No. 653 of 1982, heard on 15th August, 1985. ‑‑‑Ss. 21(1) & 22‑‑Ejectment orders‑‑Execution of‑‑Executing Court‑ Jurisdiction‑‑Rent Controller as an Executing Court, held, could not hold inquiry on allegations of fraud and misrepresentation which would have effect of nullifying order of ejectment passed by Rent Controller. Iqbal Kazi for Appellant. Akhtar Mahmud for Respondents. Date of hearing: 15th August, 1985. This order will govern the disposal of above noted three rent appeals filed by the same person against the order of Rent Controller, dated 27‑5‑1982 rejecting the objections of appellant in execution proceedings and maintaining the order of eviction. In order to dispose of these appeals it is necessary to state here background of present litigation. The respondent /landlord instituted ejectment cases under section 13 of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 on the grounds of default in payment of rent and reconstruction in respect of 3 shops premises which are subject‑matter of these appeals. Messrs Abbasi Litho Press was impleaded as tenant of all the cases. The proceedings were contested by one Abbas son of Saifuddin as Manager of Abbasi Litho Press. The Rent Controller in the course of proceedings passed tentative rent orders for deposit of rent in all the above cases directing the tenant to deposit arrears as well as monthly rents in Court. The tentative rent order was however not complied with by the tenant with the result his defence was struck off and the tenant was directed to put the landlord in possession of the premises. When execution proceedings started against Messrs Abbasi Litho Press, the present appellant appeared before the Rent Controller and filed objection contending that he was originally one of the partners of Abbasi Litho Art Press alongwith Saifuddin and that the said partnership was dissolved in the year 1970 with the result that out of the 5 tenements in occupation of‑the firm, 2J tenements namely Shop Nos. 4, 15 and a portion of tenement No. 13 came to his share while the remaining portion went to Saifuddin. It was also contended by the appellant that since then the appellant was in exclusive possession of the aforesaid 21 premises as tenant to the knowledge of the landlord and carried on business under the name of style of Yousuf Press, while in the remaining half portion, the other partner Saifuddin carried on business under the name and style of original partnership. In this background, it was contended before the learned Rent Controller that the order of ejectment obtained in the above three rent cases was the result of fraud, misrepresentation and collusion between the respondent and the said Saifuddin and, therefore, the same could not be executed against the appellant, who is holding the premises in his own right. Simultaneous to the above objections before the Rent Controller, the appellant also instituted Suit No. 1014/82 before the civil Court challenging the order and decree of the Rent Controller directing ejectment of Messrs Abbasi Litho Press as having been obtained by misrepresentation, fraud and collusion. The Rent Controller who was acting as the executing Court rejected the objection of the appellant on the ground that the appellant was not party to the proceedings before the Rent Controller which were contested by the tenant. Mr. Iqbal Kazi, Advocate for the appellant contends that there was ample material on record before the Controller to show that the order of ejectment was obtained by fraud, misrepresentation and even the description of opponent was not correctly shown. It is accordingly contended that no proper service even on the tenant in the case was effected. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at length, I am of the view that as an executing Court, the Rent Controller could not hold enquiry in the allegations of fraud and misrepresentation which would have the effect of nullifying the order of ejectment passed in these cases. More so, in the present cases when the dispute on identical allegations is pending before civil Court in a civil suit. I may mention here that Mr. Iqbal Kazi pointed out in detail the alleged circumstances, which according to him established fraud and misrepresentation but I will refrain from expressing any opinion on them, less it may prejudice the trial of civil suit in either way. In these circumstances, the learned Rent Controller rightly rejected the objection of the appellant. I accordingly dismiss these appeals with no order as to costs but it is clarified that dismissal of these appeals will not prejudice the trial of pending civil suit in any manner.