Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SAEED versus UNITED BANK LIMITED, KARACHI

The Sindh Tenant Limitation Ordinance 1979 sections 15 (2) (iii) (iv) and (v) the landlord alleged that the tenant violating the lease agreement had increased and altered the premises without the permission of the landlord. And the modifications made by the tenant claimed that due to the landlord's negligence, dirty water flowed from the roof and drainage to maintain the premises, and the equipment was left to the tenant. It is claimed that the nature and utility of the premises was increased by the necessary repairs after the heavy expenses were raised; the alleged additions and alterations, or about ten years before the tenant filed a newborn petition against him. This amount was made by the landlord for such interference. Exemptions for earlier violations, if no cross-examination was made by a tenant landlord, whatever was stated by H I, should be taken as a valid landlord when it comes to justifying his charge. Failure, the tenant's controller was set aside and reversed on appeal in favor of the landlord and the eviction order against the tenant, without taking into account the facts and material on record. immigration advocates from Taxila lawyer