1. This Rent Appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the order of ejectment in Rent Case No.137 of 1992 Mst. Zubaida Bai v. Mst. Mariam, passed by the IIIrd Senior Civil Judge and Rent Controller, Karachi Central dated 15-3-1993, striking of the defence of the appellant/opponent and ordering her to vacate the premises in dispute.
2. ' Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with, the aforesaid order of ejectment, the appellant preferred the above appeal.
3. ' Mr. Abdul Latif A. Shakoor, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that by virtue of the judgment of this Court dated 26-11-1995, in suit No.451 of 1995, filed by Messrs Bantva Memon Rahat Committee, against the aforesaid respondent and Messrs Pakistan Memon Educational and Welfare Society, the plaintiffs have been held to be the owner/landlord of a portion House No.147/3, Bantva Town, Federal 'B' Area, Karachi, which is the property in dispute in the aforesaid Rent Appeal.
4. He further submitted that in view of the above findings of this Court, the rent Application filed by the respondent in her capacity as landlady/owner of the property in dispute would be deemed to be without any authority, illegal and void as the very existence of relationship of landlord and tenant could not have been validly determined in respect of the aforesaid parties, which is an essential ingredient for the exercise of jurisdiction for entertaining an ejectment application. He further submitted that in view of the above facts and circumstances, the ejectment application filed on behalf of the appellant was illegal and not maintainable and ought to have been dismissed by the Rent Controller as not maintainable inasmuch as the respondent/opponent was not the owner or the landlord of the appellant and the respondent had made a false and frivolous statement with regard to she being the owner of the premises in dispute and being the landlord of the appellant.
5. I have considered the arguments advanced by Mr. Abdul Latif A. Shahkoor, learned counsel for the appellant and I have also perused the material on record. The first ingredient which is required to be established before the Rent Controller for exercising the jurisdiction under the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, is the existence of relationship of landlord and tenant between the concerned parties. The Rent Controller in the rent case filed by the respondent assumed jurisdiction after holding the respondent to be the owner/landlord of the premises in dispute and further holding that the relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the parties. However, in view of the findings of this Court in Suit No.451 of 1995, the alleged claim of the respondent of being the owner/landlord of the premises in dispute would appear to be a false and frivolous claim and she had no authority or right to file the ejectment application against the appellant as she or her late husband had never enjoyed ownership or proprietary rights in respect of the property in dispute so as to claim herself to be the landlord as defined in the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. The rent case filed by the respondent for ejectment of the appellant from the premises in dispute, was not maintainable, without any authority and illegal and ought to have been dismissed as such. However, the Trial Court proceeded with the same in accordance with the law and ordered ejectment of the appellant which has been challenged by the appellant by means of the above appeal.
6. In view of the above discussion I allow this appeal and set aside the A impugned order of ejectment and dismiss the rent application as being false, frivolous and not maintainable.