livelawpk.com - Tenants and Sub-Lessees must adhere to Lease Agreements ---

Tenants and Sub-Lessees must adhere to Lease Agreements and cannot evade Eviction by raising Unsubstantiated Claims --- Supreme Court of Pakistan

1 week, 4 days
47

Tenants and Sub-Lessees must adhere to Lease Agreements and cannot evade Eviction by raising Unsubstantiated Claims --- Supreme Court of Pakistan

Islamabad 28-12-2024: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has dismissed a Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal (CPLA) in a rent eviction case involving allegations of default and unauthorized subletting. The decision, delivered by a bench comprising Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan and Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, upheld the findings of three lower Courts, affirming the validity of the eviction order.

The dispute arose when the respondent, Mst. Nasreen Akhtar, filed an eviction application against the late lessee, Maqsood Ahmed Khan, and the petitioners, Sadaqat Ali and another, for defaulting on rent payments and unlawfully subletting the property. The Rent Controller issued notices through multiple modes, but the petitioners failed to appear, leading to an ex parte judgment on July 18, 2006.

Subsequently, the petitioners filed an application under Section 12(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to set aside the ex parte judgment, alleging fraud and misrepresentation. However, their application and subsequent appeals were dismissed by the Rent Controller, the District Court, and the Sindh High Court.

The petitioners contended that notices were not served properly and alleged fraudulent conduct by the respondent. They also claimed ownership of the disputed property, challenging the respondent’s eviction proceedings. The respondent argued that all notices were duly served and the petitioners’ claims of fraud and ownership lacked merit.

The Apex Court found that:

The Rent Controller had exhausted all legal modes of service, including bailiff, registered post, TCS, pasting notices, and publication. The petitioners’ failure to appear was deemed willful negligence.
The petitioners failed to provide substantial evidence to support allegations of fraud or misrepresentation.
The petitioners were unauthorized sub-lessees and had no independent legal claim over the property.
The Court declined to interfere with the concurrent findings of three lower Courts, citing no error of law or miscarriage of Justice.

The Court dismissed the petition, refusing leave to appeal. It emphasized that claims of fraud must be substantiated with evidence, and procedural compliance with notice requirements is critical in eviction proceedings.