1987 PLP 191 (SCMR)

SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑This is a petition for special leave from the judgment and order, dated 15‑11‑1986 of the Lahore High Court dismissing the writ petition of the petitioner against the order of ejectment passed against him under the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance.

2. Mst. Rashida Begum, respondent No. 1, filed an application under the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance against the petitioner seeking his ejectment from a house situated in Street No. 7, Ferozepura, on the assertion that the petitioner was her tenant therein and had not paid any rent for three years. The petitioner denied that he was a tenant under Mst. Rashida Begum and alleged that the house in his occupation and the land thereunder had been acquired by the Government as Kachhi Abadi under the Punjab Acquisition of Land (Housing) Act, 1973. The learned Rent Controller framed an issue to the effect whether the relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the parties. Both the petitioner as well as Mst. Rashida Begum led evidence in support of their respective positions. After considering the entire evidence the learned Rent Controller found that the petitioner was a tenant in the house in dispute under Mst. Rashida Begum. Since the petitioner had not denied that he had not paid any rent to Mst. Rashida Begum, the learned Rent Controller directed his ejectment. The petitioner challenged the order of ejectment in appeal before the learned Additional District Judge. After reappraising the evidence, the learned Additional District Judge affirmed the findings of the learned Rent Controller and dismissed the appeal. The petitioner then invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court to challenge the legality of the order of ejectment. A learned Single Judge in the High Court declined to interfere with the concurrent finding of fact as recorded by the learned Additional District Judge and the learned Rent Controller and dismissed the writ petition. The petitioner now seeks leave to appeal from the order of the High Court. 3.In coming to the conclusion that the petitioner was a tenant under Mst. Rashida Begum, the learned Additional District Judge and learned Rent Controller were influenced by a statement made by one of the witnesses produced by the petitioner himself. This witness stated that : Although the petitioner produced some notifications, which indicated that a large tract of land falling in Ferozepura had been acquired by the Government under the Punjab Acquisition of Land (Housing) Act, 1973, he was unable to show that the land so acquired included the house under his occupation. Thus, on the evidence before them the learned Additional District Judge and the Rent Controller could come to the conclusion that the petitioner was a tenant under Mst. Rashida Begum in the house in dispute. The High Court was, therefore, justified in not interfering with the finding of fact recorded by them. This petition is without merit and is hereby dismissed. S. Q. Petition dismissed.