Find a Lawyer

First Rent Appeal No.382 of 1987, decided on 29th April, 1987.

---S.15(4)--Ejectment petition accepted on ground of reconstruction--Execution proceedings--Tenant filing application during execution proceedings, praying that writ of possession be stayed till decree- holder brings on record agreement for providing accommodation in the reconstructed building as per undertaking--Counsel for decree- holder giving undertaking that landlord has no intention to sell the property and if it is ever sold, it would be subject to the conditions laid down in order of Court in its final order--Appeal not pressed in view of undertaking.

Khalilur Rehman for Appellant.

Aftab Kizilbash for Respondent.

These three First Rent Appeals under Section 21 of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance) are directed against the common order dated 12-4-1987 passed by the VIth Senior Civil Judge/Rent Controller, Karachi.

The facts leading to the filing of the above appeals are that the respondent is the landlady and she filed separate eviction applications being Rent Case Nos.1094/85, 1095/85 and 1096/85 against the appellants on the ground of reconstruction. All the three eviction applications were allowed. The appellants filed appeals being FRA Nos.802/86, 803/86 and 804/86 in this Court. By order dated 1-1-1987 I disposed of the above appeals. The respondent filed separate execution application Nos.8/87, 9/87 and 10/87 against the appellants. The appellants filed applications under Section 17 of the Ordinance praying that the writ of possession be stayed till such time the decree-holder brings on record the agreement for providing accommodation in the reconstructed building as per the undertaking. The learned Controller by his order dated 12-4-1987 dismissed the applications. These appeals are against the dismissal order.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the impugned order.

Mr. Khalilur Rehman has contended that the Respondent wants to sell the premises and the accommodation will not be provided to the appellants.

On the other hand Mr.Aftab Kizilbash the learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that section 15(4) of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance gives the evicted tenants the right of moving the controller for getting orders in their favour regaining of possession or reoccupation of similar premises in the new building. This seems to be the correct position. Mr. Kizilbash submits that the respondent has no intention to sell the premises. Mr. Aftab Kizilbash has given the following undertaking at the Bar:-

"The respondent has no intention to sell the property. However, if it is ever sold, it would be subject to the conditions laid down in the order of the court in its final stage. This will be incorporated in the sale-deed."

The learned Counsel for the appellant is satisfied with the above undertaking. In view of the above undertaking the learned counsel for the appellants does not press these appeals. The appeals are dismissed as not pressed with no order as to costs.

M. A. K./S-85/ K. Appeals 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.