Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 77 of 1980, decided on 19th March, 1980.
(On appeal from the judgment and order .of the Lahore High Court, dated 20‑11‑1979 in S. A. 0. No. 562/78).
‑ S. 13(2)‑Ejectment on ground of default in payment of rent‑Default occurring due to remittance of rent on wrong address‑Finding of courts below that mistake could have been avoided and as it involved negligence and want of due care and caution could not be ignored -Held, not exceptionable.
Zia Mahmood Mirza, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Memo for Respondent,
Date of hearing: 19th March, 1980.
‑‑The dispute in this case is regarding Bungalow No. 11, Business Men Colony, Model Town, Rahimyar Khan. This bungalow belongs to Mirza Muhammad Saleem Baig (hereinafter called the landlord) from whom the petitioners (hereinafter called the tenants) got it on rent. The landlord filed an application for ejectment of the tenants. In these proceedings the learned Rent Controller on 19‑7‑1977 directed them to deposit the future monthly rent regularly by the 15th of the month next following the one for which the rent is due. However, as that order was not complied with the learned Rent Controller struck off the defence and directed ejectment of the petitioners on 21‑5‑1978.
2. The petitioners filed an appeal which was dismissed by the learned District Judge on 18‑9‑1978 and their second appeal being S. A. O. No. 562/1978 also met the same fate and was dismissed by the High Court on 20‑11‑1979.
3. The petitioners have now come up in a petition for special leave to appeal against the same to this Court.
4. Learned counsel submitted that no doubt there had taken place a default in the tender or payment of rent for the month of November, 1977, which was ultimately remitted in February, 1978, instead of paying the same before 15th of December, 1977, but he contended that the default was not deliberate as it happened due to the despatch of the earlier cheque at a wrong address of the landlord in Multan, instead of sending it to Rahimyar Khan. All the Courts below have found that this mistake could have been easily avoided and as it involved a clear negligence and want of due care and caution therefore there was no justification to ignore it. Learned counsel could not point out violation of any principle of law applicable t cases or situations of this type.
5. The result is that this petition has no merit and is dismissed.
Petition dismissed
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer