Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YOUNUS versus IRFANULLAH KHAN

Sindh Tenant Premise Ordinance 1979 Section 15 (2) (ii) The payment of rent was a default in the payment of rent by the landlord for 7 months. The tenant denied that the landlord had never issued the receipt in which it was created. There is evidence about the number of tenants overcoming rent to the tenant that the TBC was based on a dedicated pass withdrawal order against the tenant based on the order of eviction. All counters were later handled, with no signatures missing. There was a lot of burden on the tenant, after proof of justifying the lease and the production of counterfeiting by the landlord, but in this regard the tenant had only one word and none of that. Could not find evidence that there was in fact no receipt. Issued by the landlord to the tenant or any other tenant, the forgery of the tenant on the forgery of the receipts was not always necessary nor was it necessary for the landlord to obtain the signature of the tenant. It was important that all tenants had a joint receipt book. The tenant had failed to prove the rent payment for the dispute period and was the controller of the rent. Right away he got a deliberate defaulter ask a advocate free from Chunian lawyer