2001 PLP 1530 (MLD)

The appellant Mst. Ghulam Bibi has challenged the impugned order dated 7‑4‑2000 passed by the learned III‑Rent Controller, Karachi West in Rent Case No. 5 of 1998 whereby the Rent Application under section 15 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 has been dismissed, hence this Appeal. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is lawful landlady and owner of the premises i.e. Quarter No.451, Block 27, Tara Chand Road, Karachi, which has been got transferred by the Babul Islam Housing Society and has appointed lawful attorney Muhammad Bashir, who is son‑in‑law of the appellant. The respondent has obtained the rented premises on rent for a period of 11 months, w. e. f. 1‑10‑1997 but the respondent/tenant paid the rent for the month of October, 1997 and became defaulter in the payment of rent w.e.f. November, 1997. The respondent/tenant filed written objection and thereafter the respondent/tenant filed application under section 12(2) read with section 151, C.P.C. as well as application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. And the respondent/tenant failed to put himself in cross‑examination nor filed affidavit‑in‑evidence. The respondent/tenant in his Written Statement has submitted that the application is not maintainable under the A law, there is no relationship of tenant and landlord between the parties; the appellant/landlady is neither the owner of the premises in question nor any power to receive the rent or authorized by anybody on her behalf for the same. The appellant/landlady is not lawful and landlady or owner of the premises. The respondent/tenant had claimed that his father Said Muhammad is owner of the premises in question which has been purchased through Sale Agreement dated 22‑11‑1968, The learned Rent Controller formulated the following issues for determination: (1) Whether there exists relationship as landlady and tenant between the applicant and opponent in respect of the premises in question? (2) Whether the respondent/tenant had defaulted in payment of rent? (3) Whether the applicant required the premises in question for her personal bona fide use? (4) What should the Order be? After having gone through the affidavit‑in‑evidence and other material available on record the learned Rent Controller has passed the Order in terms as stated above. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the Order passed by learned Rent Controller. The apple of discord between the parties is the Quarter No.451, Block 27, Tara Chand Road, Karachi, and both the parties are claiming to be the owner of the same premises in question and thus, title of the property in question is also at the stake. I have very carefully gone through the record and proceedings of the case. The learned Rent Controller has observed that the respondent/tenant as well as the appellant/landlady both are claiming lawful owner which cannot decide the title of the property in question in rent case and thus the appellant/landlady has failed to prove that the respondent/tenant is the tenant of the appellant/landlady. It has also been pointed out by Mr. Ashiq Ali Anwer Rana, learned counsel for respondent that the respondent is keeping the house since 1950 and now how he is being turned from owner to tenant. A civil suit is pending trial before the Senior Civil Judge, Karachi West with regard to the title between the parties. In the instant case, the appellant and respondent/tenant both have failed to prove title over the property being Quarter No.451, Block 27, Tara Chand Road, Karachi. Under the circumstance, the appeal has no merits and is accordingly dismissed. However, the appellant/landlady is at liberty to resort her remedy before another Court with regard to the title. H.B.T./G‑43/L Appeal dismissed.