Find a Lawyer

‑‑‑Ss. 8, 9 & 21(1)‑‑Fair rent‑‑Determination of‑‑Point to be considered‑‑While fixing fair rent on application of landlord, it was incumbent on Rent Controller to take into consideration all four factors specified in S. 8 of Ordinance, 1979‑‑Order of Rent Controller to increase rent by 10 as envisaged by S. 9 of Ordinance, 1979, completely ignoring those four factors, held, would be illegal and without jurisdiction‑‑Case remanded to Rent Controller to decide afresh after recording evidence in that respect.

Qaiser Qureshi for Appellant.

Ajmal Haider for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 21st August 1985.

The appellant being the landlord of a Flat No. 27 in building bearing No. 1‑K‑5 Nazimabad, Karachi filed application under section 8 of Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 for fixing its fair rent. The main grounds were that similar flats in the same building are let out at the rate of Rs.300 per month and that the cost of construction and repairing charges have increased five times since 1970 when the premises was let out to the respondent. The appellant examined himself and repeated the same facts which were stated in the application. He further stated that in 1970 the cement bags were available at Rs.8 and now its cost has arisen to Rs.59 and the same is true about the labour charges which have risen very high. He produced a copy of the rent receipt for Flat No. 52 to show that it has been let out for Rs.300 p.m. He also examined one of the tenants viz. Syed Shamsul Hassan who is paying rent @ Rs.300 per month. The learned Controller however did not agree with the contention of the appellant, noted that the appellant has not carried out the repairs and, therefore, comparing the condition of the disputed flat with the flat in respect of which a witness was examined, he increased the rent by 10%.

Mr. Qureshi, the learned counsel for the appellant contended that this was an order under section 9 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance because such increase is not contemplated by section 8. Under section 8 the Controller is required to fix fair rent of the premises on consideration of factors mentioned therein which reads as follows: ‑

"Section 8. Fair rent.‑‑(1) The Controller shall, on application by the tenant or landlord determine fair rent of the premises after taking into consideration the following factors:‑

(a) the rent of similar premises situated in the similar circumstances, in the same or adjoining locality;

(b) the rise in cost of construction and repair charges;

(c) the imposition of new taxes, if any, after commencement of the tenancy; and

(d) the annual value of the premises, if any, on which property tax is levied.

(2) Where any addition to, or improvement in any premises has been made or any tax or other public charge has been levied, enhanced, reduced or withdrawn in respect thereof, or any fixtures such as lifts or electric or other fittings have been provided thereon subsequent to the determination of the fair rent of such premises, the fair rent shall, notwithstanding the provisions of section 9 be determined or, as the case may be, revised after taking such changes into consideration.

Under section 8, the Controller while fixing fair rent, has to take into consideration all the four factors specified therein and after giving due consideration to these factors, he can determine the fair rent. The burden is cast upon the landlord to bring his case within the four requirements of section 8. Mr. Qureshi contended that even if the landlord is able to establish any one of the factors mentioned in section 8(1)(a)(b) & (c) the Controller is bound to fix the fair rent. The requirements under law have been sufficiently categorised with particularity and each one of these requirements have to be taken into consideration. It is possible that the rent of premises in similar circumstances in adjacent locality or the cost of repair may not have increased but new taxes have been imposed, then it is likely that the quantum of fair rent may be less than in cases which are covered by all the remaining factors. The last factor viz. annual value of the property, if any, on which property tax is levied should be taken into consideration. It will show the annual value as well as the rental value fixed by the authorities or declared by the owner. This factor will also assist the Controller in determining the fair rent, of the premises. It is, therefore, incumbent on the Controller to take into consideration all the factors specified in section 8. The landlord should produce evidence to bring his case within the four corners of this provision. But it does not mean that if the landlord fails to bring evidence regarding any one of the requirements of section 8 the application ‑should be rejected. Failure to establish any one of the factors may effect the quantum of fair rent. The learned Controller has completely ignored all these espects of the case although he seems to have refused to fix the fair rent at a higher rate than the agreed rate; he has increased the rent by 10% which he cannot do under section 8. Under this section he has to fix the fair rent of the premises which may be less, equal or more than the existing rent. The impugned order is set aside. The case is remanded to the learned Controller who will decide the matter after recording further evidence which the parties may produce before him.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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