Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD JAHANGIR versus EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

The Sindh Rated Premises Ordinance 1979, section 14 and 21, in a written statement regarding the personal need of the landlord, claimed that the applicant was not the widow of the landlord and even though she was the landlord's widow, she was 1 / in the premises. The 8th section is entitled to share, she could not file a eviction request nor did she prepare the deceased landlord's death certificate nor the administration letter, the tenant submitted a document with proof , Because it had allocated a certain amount of money as \ pagri, so such a document could not be deleted. However, the applicant (the proprietor) denied the tenant's entry before the tenant controller that the applicant was the landlord's widow and had filed for eviction and had filed under Sections 14 and 18 of the Ordinance. The notice was issued, it would clearly show the landlord was not mentioned in the written statement. The petitioner had done what he had to do to end the payment process. These documents did not even matter before the applicant's admission when they obtained a certificate through a job public. And did. And his signatures prove that the premises for the landlord's son and his lawyer's personal need for the premises were irrelevant and that, in any case, there was no legal transaction Could not be provided with all rentals. The controller discussed all aspects of the evidence and correctly ordered the eviction of the tenant according to the circumstances. registration advocate from Phalia lawyer