Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

GHULAM MUHAMMAD versus MUHAMMAD SAMIULLAH KHAN


Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979 Section 19 (2) Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), Section 12 (2) Order of Dismissal by Rent, Controller affirmed in the appeal filed by the tenant through the tenant. The application was made under Section 12 (2), the CPC alleging fraud against the landlord, dismissing the appeal order which had been finalized in the order passed by the Rent Controller. In the appeal, the controller of rent does not have the power to reject the final withdrawal order. Dismiss

1984 M L D 627

[Karachi]

Before Fakhruddin H.Shaikh, J

GHULAM MUHAMMAD--Appellant

versus

MUHAMMAD SAMIULLAH KHAN--Respondent

First Rent Appeal No.518 of 1984, decided on 31st May, 1984.

Sind Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--

---S.19(2)--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 12(2)--Ejectment order passed by Rent, Controller confirmed in appeal--Execution proceedings started--Application filed by tenant before Rent Controller under section 12(2), C.P.C. alleging fraud against landlord, rejected--Order impugned in appeal which was dismissed on ground that decree passed by. Rent Controller became final subject to order in appeal--Rent Controller has no power/ jurisdiction to rescind final ejectment order on ground that it was obtained by fraud--Appeal dismissed.

Ahmed Ullah Farooqui for Appellant.

Muhammad Akram Zuberi for Respondent on pre-admission notice.

Date of hearing: 31st May, 1984.

JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed against the order, dated 8th May, 1984 passed by VIII Senior Civil Judge and Rent Controller, Karachi issuing writ of possession against the appellant in pursuance of ejectment order passed in Rent Case No.2407/1971. The appellant had filed appeal against the said order, to this Court which was F.R.A.No.23/1979 which was dismissed by this Court by order, dated 15-4-1981.

2. When the respondent started execution proceedings, the present appellant filed an application under section 12(2), C.P.C. on 2-10-1983 alleging that the respondent has fraudulently got the premises in question transferred to himself and that the matter regarding its transfer is still pending before the Settlement Authorities. This application was dismissed by the learned Rent Controller by order dated 8-5-1984, whereby he also directed that writ of possession may be issued against the appellant.

3. This appeal is misconceived because the ejectment order had become final after it was confirmed in appeal by this Court on 15-4-1981. The proper course for the appellant was to have filed appeal before Supreme Court.

4. In execution proceedings the learned Rent Controller had no jurisdiction to set aside the decree on the ground that it was obtained by fraud. Once a decree is passed by a Rent Controller, it becomes final subject to the order in appeal. Since the ejectment order has been confirmed in appeal, hence the Rent Controller had no jurisdiction to discharge execution proceedings on the application of the appellant under section 12(2) of C.P.C., which in terms does not apply to proceedings under the Rented Premises Ordinance of 1979.

5. Subsection (2) of section 19 of the said Ordinance lays down that even if an ex parte order has been made by the Rent Controller, he shall have no power to rescind such order. On the same analogy it can be said that the learned Rent Controller shall have no jurisdiction or power to rescind the final ejectment order on the ground that it was obtained by fraud. The proper remedy for the appellant would be to file a Civil Suit. It is stated at the bar by Mr.Ahmed Ullah Farooqui that he has already filed a suit for declaration and injunction in respect of the premises in question.

In view of the above legal and factual position, this appeal is without any substance and is dismissed.

M. I. Appeal dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
criminal advocate from Dera Ismail Khan lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.