2009 PLP 1077 (SCMR)
ABBAS ALI KHAN — Petitioner Versus Mst. FARHAT IQBAL and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2009 PLP 1077 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan and Zia Perwez, JJ |
| Parties | ABBAS ALI KHAN — Petitioner Versus Mst. FARHAT IQBAL and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 1077 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP 1077 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan and Zia Perwez, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 1077 (SCMR) (ABBAS ALI KHAN — Petitioner Versus Mst. FARHAT IQBAL and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Arshad Ramay, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Maqbool Sadiq, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 12th February, 2009.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 6-11-2008 of Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Writ Petition No.12983 of 2008).
S. 13
Ejectment of tenant on grounds of default and bona fide need of landlady
Tenant taking the plea that he was owner of the property on the basis of an agreement to sell executed by the landlady
Tenant had not filed any copy of the said agreement of sale with the petition and admitted that the original of same had been lost
Tenant had admitted the title of landlady in his pleadings and that he obtained the possession of the premises from her
Agreement to sell, held, did not confer title and tenant on the basis of such agreement was not entitled to deny relationship of landlord and tenant
Plea of tenant being mala fide, he was liable to be straightaway ejected.
Judgment & Decree
SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN; J.
Abbas Ali Khan, an ejected tenant, seeks leave to appeal from the judgment, dated 6-11-2008 of Lahore High Court, whereby, his writ petition was dismissed, maintaining the ejectment order, dated -7-2008, passed by the Appellate Court.
2. Mst Farhat Iqbal brought a petition against Abbas Ali Khan, seeking his ejectment from Property No.S-52-R of 1989, Nisbat Road, Lahore on grounds of default in payment of rent and bona fide personal need. The petition was contested by the petitioner, denying the required relationship, on the ground that he was an owner on the basis of an agreement to sell executed by Mst. Farhat Iqbal after having received a sum of -Rs.3,00,000 as earnest money.
3. The Rent Controller dismissed the ejectment petition but, in appeal, First Appellate Court ordered ejectment against which the writ petition also failed.
4. A detailed perusal of record would indicate that the learned First Appellate Court had thoroughly examined, discussed and discerned the evidence. It had rightly arrived the conclusion it arrived at. In view of the evidence on record, the learned High Court was perfectly right in upholding the view of the Appellate Court.
5. In pleadings of the parties, the petitioner has clearly admitted the title of the landlady as alleged in para. No.1 of the petition. He also admitted that he obtained possession from the respondent lady, who also has tenants in numerous adjacent properties. The stance, concerning agreement of sale, taken by the petitioner, is altogether fake because an agreement to sell does not confer title and a tenant on the basis of such agreement is not entitled to deny the relationship in question. Owing to this legal aspect alone, the stance taken by the petitioner being mala fide, he was liable to straightaway ejectment.
6. The intriguing aspect of the case is that the petitioner has not filed any copy of agreement of sale with the instant petition. During cross-examination, he categorically admitted that he has lost the original agreement. Any such agreement has not seen the light of the day. The entire litigation of the petitioner is based on mala fides.
7. There being no force in the petition, it is hereby dismissed and leave to appeal refused. M.B.A./A-30/SC Petition dismissed.