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.
First Rent Appeal No.1047 of 1982, decided on 12th October, 1983.
---Ss.15, 20 & 21--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXIII, r.1 (1) --Ejectment application filed by landlady through her husband as attorney--During evidence it was found that power-of-attorney was defective which did not authorise attorney to verify plaint on her behalf--Landlady made an application to withdraw petition with permission to file a fresh application of ejectment--Controller allowed application--In view of S. 20 of Ordinance, 1979- tenant contended that Rent Controller had no power under O.XXIII, r. 1(1), C.P.C. to permit landlady to withdraw application for fresh ejectment application--Held: Rent Controller following equitable principles, was fully competent to permit landlord to withdraw ejectment case with liberty to file fresh one--Appeal rejected.
Bambino Ltd. v. Messrs Selmore International Ltd. and another P L D 1983 S C 155 ref.
Mohsin Tayyab Ali for Appellant.
H.A. Rehmani for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 12th October, 1983.
The appellant has filed this appeal to impugn order dated 9-10-1982 passed by Second Senior Civil Judge and Rent Controller, Karachi permitting the respondent to withdraw her rent case with permission to file fresh one.
The respondent is landlord while the appellant is her tenant in the house situated in Alimgir Road, Karachi. She had filed an ejectment case under section 15 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 being rent case Na.4422 of 1981 before the Rent Controller, Karachi, through her husband and attorney Shaikh Muhammad Ahmad. During the evidence produced by the respondent it transpired that the power-of-attorney executed by the respondent in favour of her husband was defective and did not authorise the attorney to file and verify plaints on her behalf. She therefore made an application before the Rent Controller on 22-4-1982 praying that she may be allowed to withdraw the rent case with permission to file fresh ejectment application.
On the above application the learned Rent Controller heard the parties and allowed the application.
Mr. Mohsin Tayyab Ali learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the Rent Controller had no power under order XXIII, rule 1, (1) C.P.C to permit the respondent to file fresh ejectment application. He has referred to section 20 of the Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 which has given limited powers to Rent Controller under C.P.C. His argument is that a Rent Controller cannot resort to any provisions of C.P.C other than those mentioned in section 20 of the said Ordinance and therefore the impugned order which has been passed under order XXIII, rule 1,C.P.C. is null and void.
Mr.H.A. Rehmani learned counsel for the respondent has on the contrary argued that a Rent Controller is not precluded from applying the provisions of C.P.C. on equitable principles to proceedings under the said Ordinance. In support of this plea he has relied on the case of Messrs Bambino Ltd. v. Messrs Selmore International Ltd. and another P L D 1983 S C 155 in which it has been held by Supreme Court that in spite of the provision contained in section 20 of the said Ordinance the Rent Controller is free to follow on equitable principle, the provisions of the C.P.C. In view of the above observation, the learned Rent Controller was fully competent to pass the impugned order permitting the respondent to withdraw the ejectment case with liberty to file fresh one. This appeal has no substance and is therefore dismissed with costs.
M . A . K . Appeal dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer