1992 PLP 2276 (CLC)

The appellant is aggrieved by an order dated 4‑8‑1991 passed by the learned IIIrd Rent Controller East, Karachi, whereby he struck off the defence of the appellant and directed him to hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of house bearing No.2/~7‑C situated at P.E.C.H.S., Karachi to the respondent. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the respondent filed an application under section 15 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance against the appellant on the ground of default in the payment of rent from December, 1988 to February, 1989 at the rate of Rs.400 per month totalling Rs.1,

200. In the said proceedings on 12‑12‑1989 a consent tentative rent order was passed by the learned Rent Controller which reads as follows:‑‑ "The opponent side in their objections have not disputed the existence of relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, so also the rate of rent, but they have claimed that they are depositing the rent in Misc. Rent Case No. 363/1989. Both the learned counsel jointly requested this Court that the applicant will withdraw the previous rent already deposited in Miscellaneous Rent Case No.353/1989 and order for future rent be passed. In view of the above discussion the instant application is allowed by consent only to the extent of depositing of future rent in this rent case at the rate of Rs.300 the share of present applicants as fixed by the Hon'ble High Court in Civil Suit No. 177/1988 on or about l0th of each calendar month. Order accordingly." On 17‑11‑1(0) the respondent moved an application under section 16(2) of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance stating that instead of depositing rent f6r the months of May, 1990 to July, 1990 in the rent case, the appellant had deposited it in Miscellaneous Rent Case No.353/1989 and again he failed to deposit rent for the months of August and September, 1990 either in rent case or in the said Miscellaneous Rent Case, thus his defence is liable to be struck off. It is an admitted position that the appellant deposited the rent for the months of May 1990 to July 1990 not in rent case from which this appeal has arisen but in Miscellaneous Rent Case No.353/1989 in which the appellant had been depositing rent previously. This indeed is in violation of the consent tentative order. Even if this deposit may be taken as technical default there is admittedly default in payment of rent for the month of August 1990 as according to the Nazir's report submitted by the appellant, rent for this month was deposited by the appellant on 18‑9‑1990 for which there is no plausible explanation on record. Hence I find no merit in the appeal which is hereby dismissed with costs with direction to the appellant to vacate and hand over the premises in question viz. House No.2/27‑C, P.E.C.H.S., Karachi within two months hereof. H.B.T./190/F‑K Appeal dismissed.