1991 PLP 1067 (CLC)

This appeal has been filed challenging the order passed by the Additional Controller of Rents, Clifton, Karachi, on 25‑6‑1987 in Rent Case No.47/86.

2. Briefly the facts are that the above‑said case was filed by the present respondent Mrs. S. Aftab mainly on the grounds of nuisance, conversion, unauthorised additions and alterations and personal requirement. During the proceedings, when the applicant was cross‑examined, the learned counsel for the present appellant submitted an application to the effect that the applicant being foreigner is not entitled to hold the property ir, Pakistan and, therefore, the earlier application filed by her is not maintainable in law. This application was dismissed by the Rent Controller by an order passed on 1.7‑1‑1987, wherein it was observed that the present appellant in the written objections filed before the Rent Controller had admitted to be the tenant of the present respondent and, therefore, the question of non‑maintainability of application before him would arise as the parties are governed by the definition of the landlord and tenant as given in Cantonments Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1963. However, it was also observed in the said order by the Rent Controller that in case the present respondent was not entitled to hold or own any property in Pakistan, it would be for the competent forum to decide and that he had no jurisdiction to decide the said issue. Subsequently, the opponent moved another application for recalling the above‑said order, but the learned Rent Controller on this application framed the issue with regard to the determination of relationship of landlord and tenant and while deciding that issue observed that there was such relationship between the parties and since the present appellant has challenged the relationship, therefore, the only consequence is to order the ejectment. 3. 1 have heard Mr. Khalid Lateef, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Abdul Hafeez Lakho, Advocate for the respondent. From the perusal of the record, it appears that the application moved by Mr. Khalid Lateef for the present appellant before the Rent Controller was to the effect of challenging the maintainability of the ejectment application before the Rent Controller and there is nothing said in this application denying the relationship of landlord and tenant. On the contrary in para. 2 of the written objections filed by the present appellant before the Rent Controller, he has specifically admitted that he is the tenant of the applicant in the said premises. In these circumstances, since the relationship of landlord and tenant has been admitted, the Rent Controller should have framed the issue with regard to the maintainability of the application and not with regard to the relationship. 4. 1 accordingly set aside the impugned order and remand the case back to the Additional Controller of Rent Clifton, Karachi, for trial on merits, who should frame the issues arising out of the pleadings of the parties and proceed with the case according to law. There will be no order as to costs. H.B.T./M‑1340/K Order accordingly.