2012 PLP 83 (YLR)

FAISAL ARAB, J.

The respondent No.1 was originally tenant of one Mst. Shahida Begum. On 23-2-2005. Mst. Shahida Begum issued notice to the respondent No.1 stating that she has sold out the entire building in which rented premises is located to one Syed Abid Ali son of Syed Wahid Ali resident of Canada through his attorney Syed Khalid Ali son of Syed Wahid Ali, and thereafter, monthly rent be now paid to attorney of new owner namely Syed Khalid Ali. On 30-3-2005 the respondent No.1 through his counsel wrote back to previous owner Mst. Shahida Begum and while acknowledging receipt of her notice dated 23-2-2005, called upon her to provide address of the attorney of the new owner to whom rent is to be paid. However, no address was provided. In this background the respondent No.1 remitted rent through money order to Mst. Shahida Begum on 21-4-2005 which was refused by her. Thereafter the respondent No.1 started depositing rent in MRC No.257 of 2005 in the joint names of the previous as well as new owner. Then in July, 2005 Khalid Ali the attorney of new owner demanded rent from respondent No.1 upon which respondent No.1 demanded proof of ownership of new owner as well as proof that Khalid Ali is attorney of the new owner. The attorney gave address of his residence to the respondent No.1 but did not give a copy of power of attorney on the basis of which he was claiming to be attorney of the new owner. The respondent No.1 however, continued to deposit rent in the joint names of previous as well as new owners. The new owner then filed rent case through his attorney on the grounds of default and personal use. Rent case was contested. Rent Controller passed eviction order only on the ground of default. The respondent No.1 then appealed which was allowed in which it was held that no default was committed as new owner never sent notice under section 18 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. It was also held that notice with regard to change of ownership was sent by previous owner but it did not contain address of the attorney of the new owner. Hence it was finally held that from the month of December, 2005 when the respondent No.1 came to know about address of new owner, he started depositing rent in the name of new owner in MRC No.823 of 2005 and in the light of this background it was held that no default has been committed, consequently appeal was allowed, hence this petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner i.e., new owner argued that as notice dated 23-2-2005 was admittedly received by the respondent No.1 through previous owner, the respondent No.1 ought to have paid rent to new owner through his attorney. He next contended that demand of the respondent No.1 to show title documents and power of attorney was not justified as tenant has no right to seek such documents. In support of his contentions, he relied upon 1990 CLC 904, 2001 SCMR 678, 2002 SCMR 237, 2003 MLD 480, 2008 CLC 431, 2010 MLD 1543, 2008 SCMR 1140, 2009 SBLR 816 and 2001 SCMR 1888. No doubt the tenant is not entitled to seek title documents before tendering rent to new landlord however notice served by previous landlady did not indicate address of the attorney of new owner. Where rent is to be tendered to attorney then at least attorney should have approached the respondent No.1 with a copy of power of attorney to demonstrate that he is duly authorized by the owner to collect rent. Right to collect rent apart from owner is only of such person who is duly authorized by real owner. It was therefore, obligation of the attorney to show power of attorney authorizing him to collect rent on behalf of real owner Abid Ali. Purpose of execution of power of attorney is that when it is demanded by a third person, the attorney is bound to show to him in order to demonstrate that he is authorized by owner to act as attorney on his behalf. Without showing copy of power of attorney, no legal obligation is created on a person to treat a stranger who is admittedly not an owner to be attorney of the owner. Even if tenant comes to know about address of person who claims to be attorney of owner, unless he demonstrates through documents that he has been authorized to collect rent on behalf of owner, no legal obligation is created on tenant to pay rent to such person. Admittedly, no power or attorney was shown. In the circumstances, appellate court rightly allowed the appeal on the ground of no default in the payment of rent and this court finds no justification to interfere with the findings of 1st Additional District Judge, Karachi (Central). Vide short order dated 6-10-2011, this petition was dismissed and these are the reasons thereof. M.H./A-139/K Petition dismissed.