Proof of Oral Tenancy – Eviction Petition Dismissed (2025 CLC 1418, Sindh High Court Sukkur Bench)
Proof of Oral Tenancy – Eviction Petition Dismissed
(2025 CLC 1418 – Sindh High Court, Sukkur Bench)
مقدمہ کا پس منظر
شمشاد بیگم نے دعویٰ کیا کہ اس کے والد نے 1988 میں مدعا علیہ کے والد کو زبانی طور پر مکان کرایہ پر دیا تھا۔ والدین کی وفات کے بعد مدعا علیہ کرایہ دار کے طور پر رہتا رہا لیکن کرایہ دینا بند کر دیا۔ اس بنیاد پر شمشاد بیگم نے مکان خالی کرانے کا دعویٰ دائر کیا اور Rent Controller سے بے دخلی کا حکم حاصل کیا۔
مدعا علیہ نے اس حکم کو سیکشن 12(2) CPC کے تحت چیلنج کرتے ہوئے کہا کہ وہ کبھی کرایہ دار ہی نہیں رہا اور مالک–کرایہ دار کا تعلق سرے سے موجود ہی نہیں۔
قانونی سوال
اصل سوال یہ تھا کہ:
کیا مالک اور کرایہ دار کے تعلق کو بغیر تحریری کرایہ نامے کے صرف زبانی دعویٰ اور دعویدار کی بات پر تسلیم کیا جا سکتا ہے؟
---
ہائیکورٹ کے اہم مشاہدات
ہائیکورٹ نے قرار دیا کہ زبانی کرایہ داری (Oral Tenancy) ممکن ہے لیکن اس کو ثابت کرنے کے لیے مضبوط، ناقابلِ تردید اور معیاری شہادت ضروری ہے۔
ہائیکورٹ نے قرار دیا کہ کوئی کرایہ نامہ، رسید یا تحریری ثبوت پیش نہیں کیا گیا، اس لیے کرایہ داری ثابت نہیں ہو سکی۔
ہائیکورٹ نے قرار دیا کہ جب مالک–کرایہ دار کا تعلق ہی متنازع ہو تو Rent Controller کو سب سے پہلے اسی تعلق پر فیصلہ کرنا چاہیے، ورنہ اس کا دائرہ اختیار قائم نہیں ہوتا۔
ہائیکورٹ نے قرار دیا کہ Rent Controller ضرورت پڑنے پر CPC کے اصول (خصوصاً سیکشن 12(2)) استعمال کر سکتا ہے کیونکہ Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance کی دفعہ 20 بار مطلق نہیں ہے۔
فیصلہ
چونکہ شمشاد بیگم کرایہ داری کا تعلق ثابت نہ کر سکی، اس لیے ہائیکورٹ نے اس کی آئینی درخواست کو ناقابلِ سماعت قرار دے کر خارج کر دیا اور Rent Controller کو ہدایت دی کہ وہ 12(2) CPC کی درخواست پر جلد فیصلہ کرے۔
نتیجہ
یہ فیصلہ واضح کرتا ہے کہ:
زبانی کرایہ داری ممکن تو ہے لیکن اس کے ثبوت کے لیے مضبوط شہادت لازمی ہے۔
صرف زبانی دعویٰ پر کرایہ داری قائم نہیں کی جا سکتی۔
کرایہ داری کے تعلق کے بغیر مکان خالی کروانے کا دعویٰ قابلِ سماعت نہیں ہوتا۔
Petition allow
2025 CLC 1418
[Sindh (Sukkur Bench)] Before Abdul Hamid Bhurgri, J
lo
Mst. SHAMSHAD BEGUM through Attorney ---Petitioner
versus
SHAHID ALI and 3 others ---Respondents
¿C. P. No. S-240 of 2024, decided on 21st April, 2025.
CLC
Responden which he petitioner Constituti "whether record in the rent burden fe could inj probabili agreeme present purporte agreeme establis tenancy high sa establis Rent Ca rebutta responc C.P.C. between entire relation any do and tex to deci
bringing
CLC
[Vol. XLVI
Mer, 2002. A ndent is no mation on the
on' on the jolation of andamental in any par restriction deprived murchase of owner of efend the sale deed A a suit is ets of the th respect male deed remedies However, mority by plots of
mpugned on the any remove maining
allowed.
210251
Shamshad Begum v. Shahid All (Abdul Hamid Bhurgri, J)
1419
(a) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)
St. 5 & 20-Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 12(2)-Eviction petition---Oral tenancy, proof of-Relationship of landlord and tenant, denial of-Proof-Jurisdiction of the Rent Controller---Scope Respondent No.1 (alleged to be a tenant) claimed that he never remained in possession of the suit property-Copy of rent agreement was not produced by the petitioner (claiming to be a landlady)-The petitioner claimed that her father (purportedly the landlord) had rented out the suit property to the father of respondent No. 1 (purportedly the tenant) through an oral agreement in 1988-After predecessor-in-interest of both parties passed away, the respondent allegedly continued as tenant but defaulted on rent, and subsequently, an ex-parte eviction order was passed against him-The respondent challenged the order under S. 12(2), C.P.C., denying any landlord-tenant relationship claiming that he never remained in possession of the property-Respondent's application under S. 12(2), C.P.C. was dismissed against which he filed civil revision which was allowed, constraining the petitioner (daughter of the purported landlord) to file the present Constitutional petition---The central issue for adjudication was "whether a relationship of landlord and tenant had been established on record in the proceedings culminating in the eviction order passed by the rent controller"?---Held: In the absence of written agreement the burden fell on the party asserting the relationship to prove the same by adducing compelling and unimpeachable evidence from which the court could infer such relationship on the principle of the preponderance of probabilities-Establishment of relationship in absence of written agreement must be supported by a high threshold of evidence---In the present matter, prima facie, the petitioner (successor-in-interest of purported landlord) had not discharged that burden---No rent agreement, receipt, or any other document were produced in order to establish a landlord-tenant relationship--There can be verbal/oral tenancy also but in order to establish such tenancy an evidence of very high standard is required, from which the facts of tenancy is established on the principle of preponderance of probabilities-The Rent Controller had allowed the application only on the ground that no rebuttal had been offered in response to the tenancy claim---However, respondent No. 1 (purported tenant) in the application under S. 12(2), C.P.C. had denied the existence of relationship of landlord-tenant between the parties and called into question the maintainability of the entire proceedings-Since there was serious dispute regarding relationship between the parties and the petitioner had not produced any documentary evidence in order to prove the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, it was imperative for the Rent Controller to decide the application under S. 12(2), C.P.C. as per directions given
1420
CIVIL LAW CASES
[Vol. XLVI
in the impugned order and then proceed further-No irregularity infirmity in the impugned order was pointed out-Rent Controller wo directed to decide application under S. 12(2), C.P.C. expeditiously. Constitutional petition being devoid of merits was dismissed, in circumstance. [pp. 1424, 1426] A & C
Hafeezuddin and 2 others v. Badaruddin and 2 others PLD 200 Karachi 444 ref.
(b) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--
St. 5 & 20-Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 12(2) Application under S. 12(2) C.P.C.-Maintainability-Powers available to the Rent Controller---Objection regarding maintainability of application under S. 12(2) C.P.C. in light of S. 20 of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979-Validity-Bar under S. 20 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 is not absolute and the Rent Controller in an appropriate case may invoke the provisions of the C.P.C.-Moreover, equitable principle of C.P.C. can be invoked by the Rent Controller. [p. 1426] C
Mst. Fehmida Begum v. Muhammad Khalid and another 1992-SCMR 1908 and Ismail v. Subedar Gul Inayat Shah PLD 1991 SC 997 rel.
(c) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)---
-S. 20-Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 12(2)-Question of jurisdiction to be addressed at the outset---Principle-Relationship of landlord and tenant, denial of-Where the jurisdiction of the Rent Controller is questioned on the point that no relationship of landlord and tenant exists, the question of jurisdiction has to be addressed first before proceeding to the merits of the case. [p. 1425] B
Ms. Fehmida Begum v. Muhammad Khalid and another 1992 SCMR 1908 and Ismail v. Subedar Gul Inayat Shah PLD 1991 SC 997 rel.
Attorney Yameen Ali Khoso in person for Petitioner Abdul Mujeeb Shaikh for Respondent No. 1.
Shaharyar Awan, Assistant Advocate General. Sindh for Respondents Nos. 2 to 4.
CLC
Date of hearing: 3rd March, 2025.
2025]
Shamsha (Abd
ABDUL HAMID B jurisdiction of this Court 28.11.2024, whereby learn allowed Civil Revision No.1
2. The petitioner had respondent No.1 before lea that her father being an No. 1539 (62-2), 1540 (65-consisting of three separas Allah Wali Masjid, taluka father of respondent No.1 on monthly rent at the rat period of 11 months the petitioner's father in year Jameel Ahmed and legal h and after death of Jameel tenant. It was further av No.1 stopped monthly re rent of Rs.3,30,000/- am deposit arrears of rent al petitioner, hence cause of with following prayers:-
(a) To evict
No.1539 (
measuring
possession portions, Masjid, tal
(b) To direct rent from receiving approxima
(c) To grant a deems fit c
(d) To award
3. It is evident fr contest the application him was held good, ho recording evidence of p was allowed vide Judg CLC
No comments:
Post a Comment