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.450 of 1985, decided on 19th December, 1985.
‑‑‑S.16‑‑Arrears of rent‑‑Determination‑‑Rent Controller allowing tenant to adjust amount, if any, deposited in a rent case filed before, without determining exact amount of arrears to be deposited‑‑Order of Rent Controller, held, defective‑‑Order set aside and Controller directed to pass fresh oar according to law.
Ali Jan v. Shujauddin P L D 1985 Kar. 698 rel.
Mirza A. Rasheed for Appellant.
Altaf K. Allana for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 19th December, 1985.
This appeal is from the order dated 17‑4‑1985 whereby, the defence of the appellant has been struck off for non‑compliance of the order dated 9‑8‑1981.
2. By the said order the appellant was directed to deposit a sum of Rs.300 being the arrears of the rent from June, 1977 to July, 1981, at the rate of Rs.26 per month on or before 5‑10‑1981. The Controller however, allowed the opponent to adjust the amount of rent if any, deposited in Miscellaneous Rent Case No. 3531 of 1979. This order is defective as the Controller has not determined the exact amount of arrears after allowing adjustment of the amount of rent if any, deposited by the appellant and is therefore, hit by the rule laid down by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ali Jan v. Shujauddin PLD 1985 Kar. 698. I would, therefore, set aside the impugned order relating to deposit of the arrears of rent and direct the Controller to pass a fresh order according to law.
3. I may however clarify that so far as the order as to deposit of future rent is concerned questioned before me by Mirza Abdul Rasheed, Advocate.
4. Mr. Altaf K. Allana, Advocate for the respondent states that the appellant has also not complied with the order of the Controller as to deposit of the future rent. If it is so, the respondent shall be at liberty to make fresh application before the Controller for striking off the defence for non‑compliance of the order, which application if made, shall be decided according to law.
5. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.
M . Y . H . Appeal accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer