' MAMOON KAZI, J.---This petition, for leave to appeal, calls into question the judgment of the learned Judge in Chambers of Sindh High Court, dated 9-4-1997, fixing fair rent of the premises in occupation of the petitioner as Rs.4,000 per month, with effect from the date when the rent application was filed before the Rent. Controller.
2. The petitioner's case is that, he was in occupation of an area measuring 500 sq. Feet in the compound of State Life Building No.7, situated on M.A. Jinnah Road, Karachi, for which he was paying rent to the respondent at the rate of Rs.36.75 per month.
3. The respondent, which is the landlord of the said premises, filed an application before the VI- Senior Civil Judge and Rent Controller, Karachi (South), requesting him to fix the fair rent of the said premises at the rate of Rs.12 per square foot. It was averred by the respondent that the rent prevailing in the adjoining locality for similar premises ranged .Between Rs.16 to Rs.18 per square foot.
4. The application was resisted by the petitioner. The respondent filed affidavit of his witness, Abdul Aziz Memon, in support of his contention and the petitioner also filed affidavit-in-evidence of one Rajab Ali, who was one of its Directors. The learned Controller upon the evidence adduced by the parties, fixed the rent for the said premises at the rate of Rs.12 per square foot with effect from the institution of the case before the Rent Controller.
5. The petitioner filed appeal before the High Court of Sindh, which modified the order passed by the Rent Controller and fixed the rate of rent at Rs.8 per square foot. Before the High Court, the contention on behalf of the petitioner was that unless all the four factors enumerated in clauses
(a) to (d) of subsection (1) of section 8 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance existed, no order determining the fair rent could be passed by the Rent Controller. However, it appears that the contention did not find favour with the learned Judge of the High Court. The reasons for the said order have been stated by the learned Judge thus: "I am of the considered view that the respondent has established his case for fair rent as the value of rupee in 1963, and in 1992, when the application was filed was not the same, therefore, the respondent has established on record about increase in taxes which they are liable to pay and the portion which was rented out to the respondent is a part of building although not situated in the main building, however, compound of the building could not by any stretch of imagination be excluded from the part of building."
6. The contention of Mr. Badrudduja Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner before us has been that none of the factors referred to by the learned Judge in his order were germane to the petitioner's case and the conclusions drawn by the learned Judge were clearly based on surmises.
7. Leave is granted to consider; (1) whether existence of all the factors enumerated in section 8 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance are essential for determination of fair rent by the Rent Controller, and (2) whether the learned Judge in Chambers was justified in fixing the fair rent of the premises in question at the rate of Rs.8 per square foot, which has the effect of enhancing the rent from Rs.36.75 per month to Rs.4,000 per month.