1999SCMR2384 (PLP)
SHAUKAT ALI — Petitioner Versus Syed SHAFAQAT AHMED and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1999SCMR2384 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Irshad Hasan Khan and Ch. Muhammad Arif JJ |
| Parties | SHAUKAT ALI — Petitioner Versus Syed SHAFAQAT AHMED and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999SCMR2384 (PLP)?
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 1999SCMR2384 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Irshad Hasan Khan and Ch. Muhammad Arif JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999SCMR2384 (PLP) (SHAUKAT ALI — Petitioner Versus Syed SHAFAQAT AHMED and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sh. Khalil-ur-Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court with Syed Abul Aasim Jaferi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Ch. Inayat Ullah, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No.3.
- Date of hearing: 18th January, 1999.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 21-9-1998 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No.6471 of 1995).
Ss. 2 (c) (i), 13 (2) (i) & (iv)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
Ejectment of tenant on grounds of default in payment of rent and damage to property
Existence of relationship of landlord and tenant assailed-- Effect
Tenant had contended that title of landlord in respect of property in dispute being doubtful, relationship of landlord and tenant did not exist between the patties and Rent Controller should have directed the landlord to approach Civil Court to establish his title in respect of property instead of ordering ejectment of petitioner/tenant
Rent Controller on basis of evidence produced on record had found that relationship of landlord and tenant was duly established between the parties beyond reasonable doubt and that it was not necessary to refer matter to Civil Court
Finding of Rent Controller was upheld by Appellate Authority as well as High Court
In absence of any legal infirmity or flaw with concurrent judgments of such Courts, Supreme Court refused to interfere in said judgment and declined leave to appeal.
Judgment & Decree
IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.
Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment dated 21-9-1998, passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No.6451 of 1995.
2. Brief facts are that respondent Abdul Aziz, filed an application for ejectment of the petitioner from the property, in dispute, on the ground of default and damage-to the property.
3. In view of the pleadings of the parties, issues framed thereunder the evidence led by them, the learned Rent Controller, allowed the application vide order dated 13-10-1991. Appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge vide order dated 25-4-1f
95. Same was the fate of the writ petition filed by the Petitioner, which was dismissed vide impugned judgment dated 21-9-1998. Hence this petition for leave, to appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that relationship of landlord and tenant did not exist between the parties, therefore, the Rent Controller was not right in ordering the eviction of the tenant/petitioner. He argued that the title of the respondent was doubtful, therefore, the Rent Controller should have directed the respondent to approach the Civil Court m the first instance. Reliance in support thereof was placed on Rehmatullah v. Ali Muhammad (1983 SCMR 1064). The contention is devoid of any force. The learned Rent Controller, in view of the evidence adduced before him, was satisfied that relationship of landlord and tenant was established between the parties beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, it was not necessary to refer the matter to the Civil Court. It would be advantageous to reproduce paragraph 9 of the impugned judgment, which reads thus:-- "As noted supra, the oral tenancy is proved by the evidence of the respondent which had been correctly appreciated by the Rent controller as well as by the appellate authority-. The petitioner having been inducted as a tenant cannot question the title of the respondent. Taking a false plea and not claiming payment of rent for the disputed period, the learned Rent Controller rightly ordered his forthwith eviction on the decision of preliminary issue The findings recorded by the two Courts below do trot suffer from any jurisdictional error or error of law, hence no ground is shown for seeking interference. Resultantly, this writ petition being without merit is dismissed. The petitioner is allowed a period of three months to deliver vacant possession of the rented premises to the respondent, "
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material available on record, we find no legal infirmity or flaw with the impugned judgment, warranting interference by this Court.
6. Resultantly, the petition is dismissed and leave declined. H.B.T./S-127/S Petition dismissed,