After hearing the learned counsel for respondent No.2, Ch. Sher Muhammad, I admit this writ petition to regular hearing.
2. Since a short point is involved, and the learned counsel are ready to argue the main case, let the main case be disposed of today.
Main Case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made two-fold contentions:--
(i) the order of the learned Rent Controller and in so far as it pertains to 25% increase in therent for the purpose of payment of rent is illegal; and
(ii) the direction regarding consolidation of the present case with W.P. No.9941/92 is uncalled for and illegal.
4. It is submitted that the stances in both the cases taken by the tenants (petitioners in the writ petitions) are different. Not only confusion would be caused but serious prejudices are likely to be caused to tenants, if proceedings are taken in consolidated case.
5. In so far as the first submission of the learned counsel is concerned, at this stage, I am not inclined to interfere therewith. It is an order of tentative character and as ruled by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, such. like interimorders should not be interfered with in writ jurisdiction.
Accordingly, this submission is turned down. As regards the other submission, the learned counsel for respondent No.2, has fairly conceded that, in the circumstances of the case, consolidation of the present case with the other rent matter titled "Muhammad Saeed Ali v. Masoom Akhtar Ali" is not called for.
6. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is partly accepted and the order of the learned Rent Controller to the extent that he has ordered the consolidation of the rent case titled "Muhammad Saeed Ali v. Abdul Razzaq" with the case Muhammad Saeed Ali v. Masoom Akhtar Ali" is declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
The result is that both the rent matters shall be tried and decided separately. No costs.