The default Sindh section 15 (2) (ii) of payment of rent is that the landlord, who had filed an application against the tenant as default in payment of rent, had admitted in his own cross examination that the tenant had accepted the money. Order Tending Rent was sent. The relevant term, but he refused to accept it and after that the tenant started submitting rent to Cortlandland that the tenant was regularly collecting rent and he was withdrawing the rent from Court Landlord. Also acknowledged in its cross-examination that if rent was to be submitted then payment of rent on a part of the eviction order of tenants approved by the Rent Controller against the tenant could not be fixed in advance. Was. In more than one place it was also shown that the receipts for different miscellaneous cases were submitted by the tenant, but he was unable to disclose the period for which the deposit was made. The rent controller also said in the eviction order that the shareholder's report was also told in the court in relation to all the deposits given by the tenant, if there was any ambiguity or if the rent controller understood this. I was unclear for how long such deposits were due, he should have called the tenant to explain such ambiguity, But this type of exercise was not done by the rent controller through the Nazir report which the rent controller demanded, clearly not pointing out if a tenant was paying the rent. Passed by
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
