1. ' The appellant Pervaiz Masih has impugned the judgment, dated 31-1-1989 passed by VIIIth Rent Controller (South), Karachi in Rent Case No.178 of 1984 directing the appellant to vacate the premises being House No.2, Plot No.5-A, Reti Line, adjoining Nulla, near Chan Mari Bridge, Karachi within two months thereof.
2. ' It is averred by the respondent that he had given the said house to the appellant on rent at Rs,150 per month w.e.f. 17-5-1982, pursuant to an agreement executed by the parties. The appellant had been a wilful defaulter in the payment of rent for 22 months from 1-7-1982 to 30-4-1984 amounting to Rs,3,300.
3. ' The appellant in his written statement has denied the relationship of landlord and tenant and contended that the house belongs to one Sabir Masih, the real brother of the appellant. The so- called rent agreement produced by the respondent was a forged document and was never executed by him. It was further contended that the land is in Katchi Abadi and belongs to K.M.C.
4. ' The following issues were framed by the learned Rent Controller on the basis of the pleadings of the parties:--
(1) Whether relationship of landlord and tenant exists between the parties?
(2) Whether the opponent has committed default in payment of rent?
(3) What should the order be?
5. ' The learned Rent Controller held that the relationship of landlord and tenant exists between the parties and that the appellant had committed default in payment of rent.
6. The respondent produced a tenancy agreement dated 17-5-1982 executed between him and the appellant and found support from the attesting witnsses Jam Masih and Allah Noor, who not only admitted their signatures thereon but also verified the signatures of appellant and respondent.
7. They further stated that the house belongs to the respondent, Other two witnesses Saudagar Masih and Hidayat Masih also supported the contention of the respondent. On the other hand, the appellant in his deposition had stated that he got the house constructed through Amanat Masih, but his witness Amanat Masih in cross-examination admitted that he got the house constructed for the respondent, who is the owner thereof. There is thus sufficient satisfactory evidence to believe that the respondent is the owner and landlord of the premises as such the question of Katchi Abadi is of no significance. This is also a clear cut case of default in payment of rent as alleged by the respondent. The finding of the learned Rent Controller as to the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties is correct so also his finding that the appellant had committed default in payment of rent.
8. ' I accordingly find no substance in the appeal, which is hereby dismissed with costs.