Enhancement of rent

2020 YLR 616 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR Judicial Precedent

S. 14Ejectment petitionEnhancement of rent

Landlord, during pendency of eviction petition, moved application for enhancement of rent which was accepted and tenant was directed to deposit tentative rent

Validity

Relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the parties

Matter with regard to ejectment of tenant was subjudice before the Rent Controller

Appeal had been filed against interim order passed by the Rent Controller

Amount deposited under impugned order was subject to adjustment at the time of final disposal of the matter between the parties

Impugned order was neither a final order nor matter had been finally disposed of

Rent Controller had discretionary power to hold inquiry and he was not bound to follow the procedure stipulated in Civil Procedure Code, 1908

Rent Controller had not violated any law

Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

2016 MLD 780 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

S. 9Enhancement of rentConditionIf fair rent of the demised premises had already been fixed, rent should not be enhanced for the next three years

Bar with regard to increase of rent to the extent of ten per cent per annum would only be applicable if fair rent had already been fixed.

2012 CLC 1236 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 124 (2), 195 & Sixth Schedule, item 64Punjab Local Council (Property) Rules, 2003, Rr. 9 (2) (e), 16 (c) & 18Punjab Local Councils (Contract) Rules, 1981, R.4Constitution of Pakistan, Arts.4, 10-A, 18, 23 & 199LeaseEnhancement of rentForcible dispossession

Grievance of petitioners was that there had been a valid lease of plot in question in their favour since 1961, but Tehsil Municipal Administration forcibly dispossessed them from plot in question

Plea raised by authorities was that lease in question was executed in violation of the provisions of Punjab Local Council (Property) Rules, 2003 and petitioners were not paying rent according the market rate which had made out a case for enhancement of rent against the petitioners

Validity

Petitioners were entitled to a "reasonable notice" for enhancement of rent (variation in the terms of the lease) and in the case of their non-acceptability, for cancellation of their lease

Authorities had woken up (it is not clear whether TMA woke up on its own motion or was driven by some other vested interest) from a long slumber with a shuddering realization to immediately protect and safeguard interest of Tehsil Municipal Administration and public exchequer but in their overzealousness, insensitively trampled upon due process and rule of law guaranteed to the petitioners under the Constitution

Tehsil Municipal Administration had offended fundamental and constitutional rights of petitioners, bypassing the process provided under section 195 and the schedule to Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 2001, and violating the protections guaranteed under Articles 4, 10A, 18 and 23 of the Constitution

Rushing directly to auction leasehold rights without giving notice to existing tenants i.e. petitioners, in terms of the Schedule (which enjoyed higher legislative status than the Rules), was unabashedly unconstitutional and a blatant violation of Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 2001

Initiation of auction proceedings and resulting auction was in violation of Punjab Local Council (Property) Rules, 2003

High Court, in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction declared such auction to be illegal and set aside the same

Petition was allowed accordingly.