Find a Lawyer

NAUROZ KHAN versus ZULAKHA

Sindh Tenant Premises Ordinance 1979 Sections 16 and 21 filed an application under Section 21 (2) of the Ordinance, with an appeal against the withdrawal order issued by them by the tenant controller. That the action be withheld during the withdrawal order granted against him. The tenant's request was made with the condition that the tenant should submit the rent arrears security and submit the next month's rent before the 10th of the following month when the tenant failed to meet this condition. , The landlord filed an application under section 16 (2). Failure to comply with the appellate court's order to protect the tenant, according to which the tenant was ordered to furnish outstanding rent security and the appellate court's order for the subsequent monthly rent collection under section 16 Was not approved under. 1) of the Ordinance, 1979, but it was approved under section 21 (1) of the Ordinance, the enforcement of the order of eviction, thus its breach only meant that the rent was due to non-fulfillment of this condition. The conditional residence granted to the lender was vacant and it was transferred to the landlord to the landlord to execute the order for which the tenant's defense passed an appellate court order under section 21 (2) of the Defense Act, 1979. The order cannot be complied with because neither the rent controller nor the appellate court approved the rental order prohibiting the defense proceedings under section 16 (1) of the ordinance order. The tenant could not be approved for two reasons, first, that an application under section 16 (1) of the ordinance was filed with the landlord. attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Kotli lawyer