Shaikh Nasiruddin and Others (Petitioner) VS GhulamAli Kaderbhoy and Others (Respondent)

T<r.."t \o-^.4 P^a !^vqtJ TF.\ r'^)x-o-r q 1}* qu ('l't{'l'll;l('z\'l'11 ()l; I I ll1 I ll(;l I ('Ol,l('l ()l' lilNl)l l, l(Al(A('l ll C,l) No,:;-').4t1 ol 2023

lilrnlklr N;ullrtrrltllrt Il Ollrrlrr

V'i,

Gltttlnttt All 1(ntlorlllroy li otltors

I ll(il I ('ot il('t ()t,' slNl)l I

('1t11i1t1t1il ttttl rtf llt'tt,'lt ,\'itr ylr,

Mr. Jrrsticc Mrlltitrruttltrl l(rrrlnr l(lrlrr A11lr;r

I )ltlr'' trl' ltcltt ittll : l()-()l{-20.1,1

I )r'.'i..lt'tl tttt : l()-{)tl-2024

(:r) .lurlgrtrcnI itpprovccl Iirr l(e llortirrg l'a.s

(J I' IT'I'I II I C A'I'II

('crrillcd that tlrc.iuclurlcnt'!/Orrlcr is bascrl ul)on or cnuttciatcs a prirrciltlu ol'llrr */tlcciclcs a question of law which is ol'{lrst int;lrcssicu/distinguisltes/. Ovcr-rule si re vc rscs/expl ai ns a 1tt"ct, iotts cleci si o rr.

* Stri[(c otrt wltichcvct'is rtol. aplllicablc.

NO ll:: - (i)'l'his slill is only to bc uscd rvhcrr sonrc actiort is to [:c titlictt.

(ii)lt'thu slip is rrsccl. tlrc l(crrrler rrtrrsl itttitclt it to lltc tolr ol tltt'llrst ltirgc ol' tlic itttlgrrre rlt

(iii)Ilcrrclel ntusI usl< tlrc.ltrtlgc rvlitittg tltc.ltrtlgrrrcttt rritclltr-t lltt' Jtrtlgtttcttt i.s ltllllt'tlvt:tl lor re ;lortirrg,.

I (iv)'I lrust.rlilectiolrs rvlriclt ile noI to trc ttsetl slttrttltl lrc tltlt'li'tl

Y1

l\ I'tllf lll(;ll ('()trlt l'()l" SlNl)ll .'\'l' l(/\l{,\('lll /t, ,,,'"J . )r,.) ( f[f6rrrttrrl | 'r'r\' ('(rNSiltttil()N tit llll()N Nr) /.,(r?.r Atltl (Wrir), t. Sh.riklr N,rsir trtlt'litt srrn tll I .Slr,riklr,lVlttslirn, '\,1 rr lt,Slt.t iklt J\ l,t r[..t' t S. No 8 -,1/ 3 -4, Sor .r i Qtt.trtt'rs, K.t t,t clti s i nct' (lt'cu.,l surd tlrr.rrrglr his sr)n Sltitiklr Najarrr ud din rurrslirrt, adult,R/o Flat Nr I, r St r t,r.t Nltr rrar,Pa[.ist.ttt

Clrorvk, Koraclti.

l. ttlst. [.lrurslteed Begurl Dlo Shaiktr Fc.roluddirt,tvife of Shaikh Noor Hussairr, Nluslinr,adult,residirrg C, C U.H Klralid c\ Co, Br.r rrd retlr Road, L.r ltore

i. l\'l.rn:oor Hussairr S/o Slr.riklr Ferozuddin, ft,luslirrr,.rdult, resident of 100 Railway Road, L.r lrort,,

.1. Arrr;nullalr 5/o Shaikh teroltrddirr fvluslirrr,adult,residing at Lahort' .

5.fi4st.Kulsunl Akhtar D/0 Slrniklr Fr..rottrdt'litt, \\t i f e of [Vl u ]r.t rrr n r.rd Ar rrr;r t Sa bi r, [Vl rr s I i rr, r

Adult,C/o 0rierrtal Trudt', s Clroti Q.r[.lar', Prta rr, District Salrirvnl,

.na&

S O

All Muslim,Adult,residing at 45 Shabbirabad Dawoodl Co-Opcrative Housing,Society Karachi.

7.Faklruruddirr Ibrahinrjl .,.ExpirecJ on 72,1.1.2009

8.Fizzabai D/o EbrahinrJi,

9.Salrna Bai D/o Ebra;ri,njl,

10.Zecnat D/o Ebarhimji

l L.Tasneem Alia as Zaf reen D/o Ebrahimji 12.Zainab D/o Ebrahimji

All Muslims No:9 to 13 through their attorney Fakhruddin Ebrahimji.

13.. Mls l(aderbhoy Karimji & Sons

A firm duly registered under the partnership Act having its office at Herchand rai Road, Near Old Haji Camp.l(arachi.

1.4.fhe Vllth Sr CivilJudge and Rent Controller l(arachiSouth ,

15.The Vllth Additional District & Session Judge South , l(arachi

AII the respondents ,r.,)'r L to13 through respondent 7 since

I

deceased through hls son Hasnain Fakhar ud din R/o Flat No CC- 7/5 Najmi Co operative Housing Society Block-8, Clifton Karachi

CONSTITUTION PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 1-99 OF THE

CONSTITUTION OF ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN 1973

'q

IY

.rir-

Si

ORDBR SHBET

IGH COURT F IND T RAC I

CPN -248 of 2023 a DATD o RD DR w ITI-I S I G NATURB o F JU D L., I{e, ol cnse (prioritv}

I I?or orclcr on olficc olrjcctiotr.

2 Iror lrcarirtg of MA No. 194 7 12023 .1 Iror l:r-.ru'irtu ol ntrti tr sC.

le.og,_?42{ Mr. Muharnma.cl Faroocl, Advocate for the Petitioncr' Mr. S.M. I-laider, Advcoatc for the Respondenl. Mr. Shcheryar Qerzi, & S. Arshad Hussain Netqvi, Addl.

A.G.

I,\UHAMIMD IURIM KHAN AGHA.J., The landlord Ghulam Ali l(ader Bhoy has sought ejectment of the tenant from the Property bearing Survey No,B-a/3-A Survey sheel No.7 (new Survey No.2, new No.SR- VII, Serai Quarters Karachi (the Properly). There are two concurrent findings against the tenant on account of default in payment ol rent.

It is noted that the appellate judgment dated 25.2.2023 upheld the impugned judgment largely based on the fact that the appeal has become infructuous because tenant has vacated the premises in the following terms which are set out beiow:-

Further, it is observed that during the proceedings oi the present First Rent Appeal, the Judgment Debtors have passed the possession of demised rentccl premises to Appellant through process of Courl and in attending circumstances, virtue happening of such evcnt, the instant FRA becomes infructuous. Thc learned Counsel for the Responclent/landlord has filecl stalement to effect that on 13,e2.2O23 possession has bcen handcd ovcr to thc responclent and executiorr application slancls satisfie cl. In this regard, I lay rcfcrence to I-993 SCMR 2860, r,vherein it has been held that "---S.15---Constitution of pal<istan (1973), I ArL. 185(3)---Delivery o[ Posscssion clnring pendency ol appeal against cjcctmenl of tenant before Sr-rpreme Court ---trffect---Posscssion of clemisecl premises having becn dcliverect to larrcllacly dtrring penclency o[ appeal by tenants, appeal became infructuons ancl was thus liablc to be dismissed." I further, lay reference to 1991 CLC 999, wherein Hon'ble High Court of Sindh has held that "Ss. 2l &,22 --- Appeal---.

SZ

Maintainability---execution application from which ap-peal arosc, h."i";"#;;'aisfosed of , appeal becanre i,iri".i"""l"oni'*rs Further dismissed accordingiY''l -iil;;;;;;n Ac ,"feren"" i;r u. placecl on 2ao2

823.Thur i";';tr;;il; b*" clisiussed herein above' tl-re inslanl ril;;;;'t and order o[ "rri"i "ot -rintainable interference the learric,f C"urt ciocs not require accordingly is hereby maintained resultantly, the -First nent np1i"".i, r"t rcasons, stand clismissed' All "rrtu" the p",iOing oppti"atio. become infructuous and disrnissed arccordingly.

2.Even otherwise in the case of Wadho Akhara Trust, Karachi ..Vs.. Ghafooran and others (1993 SCMR 2360), it was held that clelivery of possession during pendency of appeal against ejectment u,here the possession has already been delivered to the landlady by the tenant appeal became infructuous and was liable to be dismissed. This is the exact position in this case) where the tenant has already left the Property.

3.Accordingly this petition is dismissed under the constrturional jurisdiction of this court where tire tenant might have alternate remedy under 1aw in the given circumstances.

JU Er "f *lz1

S/L

I

t /