Find a Lawyer

First Rent Appeal No. 195 of 1986, decided on 5th May 1986.

‑‑‑Ss. 21(1) & 22‑‑Execution of ejectment order‑‑Objections to‑‑Execution order issuing writ of possession passed by Rent Controller without taking into consideration objections raised by objector against application for execution of ejectment order, was set aside in appeal and case remanded to Rent Controller for deciding objections filed by objector in circumstances.

S. Hassan Imam Rizvi for Appellant.

Abdul Waheed Siddiqui for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 5th May, 1986.

This first rent appeal filed by the intervenor challenges the order, dated 1‑4‑1986 passed by the Rent Controller, Karachi, in Execution Application No. 6 of 1985 arising out of Rent Case No. 2292 of 1971 and ordering issuance of writ of possession... When this matter had come up before me for Katcha Peshi on 30‑4‑1986, I had allowed Mr. Abdul Waheed Siddiqui, learned counsel for the respondent, to appear at the stage of Katcha Peshi.

2. The case of the appellant is that he is occupying premises different from the premises, which was the subject‑matter of Rent Case No. 2292 of 1971, which had been filed by respondent Mst. Qaiser Jahan against one Yamin as the tenant. According to the appellant, he had filed objections in Execution Application No. 6 of 1985 but the said objections were not considered and the impugned order dated 1‑4‑1986 does not refer to any of the points raised by the intervener /objector in the objections, dated 6‑3‑1986. The appeal is admitted to regular hearing.

With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties regular hearing of the appeal is also taken up today. R & P of the rent case and also the Execution Application No. 6 of 1985 are available. Several points were raised in the objections filed on 6‑3‑1986 by the objector/ appellant. A perusal of the impugned order,‑ dated 1‑4‑1986 shows ‑that none of the points raised have been decided by the Rent Controller. A case is made out from remand of the matter to the Rent Controller for deciding the objections filed by the appellant /objector on 6‑3‑1986. Mr. Abdul Waheed Siddiqui, learned counsel for the respondent, submit that the matter has been pending since 1971, when the ejectment application had been filed by the respondent and a direction for earl disposal of the execution application may be given.

3. The impugned order, dated 1‑4‑1986 in Execution Application No. 6 of 1985 passed by the learned VIth Senior Civil Judge/Rent Controller (West) Karachi, is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Rent Controller for deciding the objections filed by the appellant/ objector Zafaruddin on 6‑3‑1986 in Execution Application No.6 of 1985. To avoid issuance of fresh notices to the parties on remand, by consent of the learned counsel, who are present before me the next date before the Rent Controller is fixed as 17‑5‑1986, for which no notice will be to the parties, as the two learned counsel have noted the next date of hearing before the Rent Controller as 17‑5‑1986 on behalf of their respective clients, As the matter has been pending for a long time in the sense that the ejectment application had been filed in 1971, it is directed that the Rent Controller will dispose of this execution application finally by 31‑7‑1986.

First Rent Appeal No. 195/86 stands disposed of in terms of the above order with no order as to costs. As the order, dated 1‑4‑1986 has been set aside, stay application; C. M. A. No. 560 of 1986 has become infructuous and stands dismissed as such.

H.B.T Order accordingly.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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