JUDGMENT IMAM ALI G. KAZI, J. - The appellant. Mir/a Muhammad Sabir Baig, claimed to be the tenant of Flat No.4 on the first floor, a godown No. 15 on the ground floor and a shop No.14 on the ground floor in the building bearing No. NP- 10/21 on payment of rent at the rale of Rs. 13/- per month, Rs.12/- per month and Rs.5/- per month respectively. He carries on the business of preparing "Haleem" in the said premises owned by respondent Muhammad Saeed.
2. The appellant filed an application under Section l2 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance. 1979 in the Court of VIth Senior Civil Judge and Rent Controller Karachi (South) complaining that the landlord (respondent) has failed to carry out repairs to Flat No.4 and other premises including the partition wall and that he be directed to carry out the necessary repairs in the demised tenements.
The respondent, Muhammad Saeed, resisted this application and recorded his objections.
Appellant Mirza Muhammad Sabir Baig tiled an affidavit in evidence while Respondent filed his counter affidavit. Neither of the two Muhammad Sharif V. Member (Rev.) C.C. 400 Board of Revenue Punjab. parlies tendered Scrumhalves for cross-examination by the other side nor any evidence was led by either of them. The Rent Controller under the circumstances reached a conclusion that there was no evidence on record in support of the issues settled by him on the basis of the pleadings from either of the two parties and he dismissed the application by his judgment passed on 14.5.1992. It is against this judgment that the present appeal under Section 21 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance. I()7() has been filed.
1. The appellant Mirza Muhammad Sabir Baig appeared in person and contended that affidavit of ev idence filed by him was sufficient proof of his cases while respondent Muhammad Saved, who also appeared in person, claimed that the appeal filed bv the appellant was on frivolous ground.
4. The term "evidence" according to its interpretation provided by Article 2(1) (c) of the Qanun -c- Shahadat Order. 19,34 means all statements that a Court may permit or require lt) be made before to by witnesses in relation to matters of fact under inquiry and the documents produced for inspection ol the Court. Examination of a witness tis provided bv Articles 132 and 133 of the Qanun- e-Shahadat Order, 19X4 means examination-in-clich. Cross-examination and re-examination, if tiny, it is only when witness goes through such process that, his statement takes the form of evidence in a case, In the present case both the parties had merely filed affidavits in support of their cases. Such affidavits by itself will not be taken to be evidence lor the purpose of decision ol the inquiry before the Rent Controller or any other Court, the Rent Controller was, therefore, right in dismissing the application.
For the above reasons I had by not short order passed on 13.9.1992. Dismissed the appeal.