1987 PLP 1638 (CLC)

Abdullah Yousaf Bhatti for Respondent. Date of hearing: 28th March, 1987. This constitutional petition has been moved to set aside the ejectment order passed by Syed Mumtaz Hussain Gillani, Additional District Judge‑I, Rahimyar Khan on 2‑2‑1986.

2. The petitioner was a tenant of the shop in dispute under the respondent. He did not pay the rent for the months of January and February 1983 as stipulated by him, so the respondent brought an ejectment petition which was dismissed by the learned Rent Controller, Rahimyar Khan. The respondent filed an appeal which was accepted on 2‑2‑1986. She has filed her ejectment petition on the ground of non‑payment of rent, personal need, on account of the fact that the value of the shop has been impaired and it was sublet without the consent of the landlady. The petitioner denied the relationship of landlady and tenant between the parties and the following issues were framed:‑ (1) Whether the applicant required the disputed property bona fide for her personal need? (2) Whether the respondent is a defaulter in the payment of rent? (3) Whether the respondent sublet the property without consent of the applicant? (4) Whether the respondent dilapidated the disputed property? (5) Whether the present application is not maintainable under the law? (5‑A) Whether the relationship of landlady and tenant exists between the parties? (6)??????? Relief. Issue vo.5‑A was settled first, and it was adjudicated that the relationship of landlady and tenant existed between the parties. Before me issue No.2 has been agitated.

3. The reliance is placed on Sheikh Abdus Sattar v. Malik Muhammad Afzal and others P L D 1985 C L C

148. It has been contended that after expiry of the agreement, rights and liabilities of tenant fell to be governed by provisions of West Pakistan Urban rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, which regulate terms as to ejectment. The parties entered into the agreement of lease on 18‑10‑1978 which was for 11 months and it expired on 18‑9‑1979. The rent was to be paid in advance per the said agreement. According to the said precedent, the terms and conditions are to be regulated by the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 which prescribes a, period of 60 days for the default of a tenant. In this case Muhammad Iqbal the husband of the respondent had appeared as A.W.‑2, who had stated that the rent from January 1983 onwards was not paid to them. It was the imperative duty of the petitioner to have proved on file that the disputed amount was paid on such and such dates. He produced two receipts mark 'A' and 'B' which have not been proved alongwith photostat copies of the challan forms which have not been referred to in the statements of his witnesses. On the file, the petitioner failed to prove as to when was the rent for the months of January and February 1983 paid or tendered. Furthermore, a tenant who denies the title of the landlady forfeits his tenancy and is precluded from pleading that he should be allowed to prove the payment of rent. Muhammad Shah Alam v. Muhammad Abdul Ghafoor 1979 S C M R 443 and Muhammad Islam Khan v. Cantonment Board Kohat 1982 S C M R 1056 also enunciate the same principle. In the circumstances, the ejectment order is maintained and the writ petition stands dismissed with costs. A.A. /F‑26/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.