2002 PLP 1198 (SCMR)

KHALIL‑UR‑REHMAN RAMDAY, J.‑‑‑This is a petition under Article 185(3) of the Constitution against an order, date 6‑2‑2002 of the Honourable Lahore High Court passed in Writ Petition No. 17177 of 1999 whereby the said Honourable High Court had refused to interfere with an order dated 8‑9‑1999 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Appellate Authority) at Faisalabad.

2. As per information made available to us through this petition, the petitioner herein had taken on rent a property located in the city of Faisalabad from Abdul Majeed respondent for which the petitioner was paying an amount of Rs.5,000 p.m. as rent to the said Haji Abdul Majeed respondent. The petitioner is stated to be running a hospital in the said property. It also appears from this petition that the said Abdul Majeed ‑ respondent sought ejectment of the petitioner from the property in question through an application made to the learned Rent Controller at Faisalabad for the purpose. This application was allowed about four years ago i.e. on 23‑6‑1998 and the petitioner had been consequently directed to vacate the premises in question. An appeal was then filed by the petitioner calling in question the said judgment/order, dated 23‑6‑1998 and during the pendency of this appeal, the petitioner submitted an application under Order 41, rule 27, C.P.C. praying for permission to adduce additional evidence. This application was filed on 1‑6‑1999 and appears to have been allowed and the petitioner appears to have been directed to produce the said additional evidence on 13‑7‑1999. The petitioner could not produce the said additional evidence on the said date and sought an adjournment which was allowed and the appeal was then fixed for the purpose on 22‑7‑1999. The same situation continued even on the said adjourned date i.e. 22‑7‑1999 and the appeal was further adjourned with the further opportunity to the petitioner to produce his additional evidence on 8‑9‑1999. Even on the said date the petitioner could not produce his evidence and prayed for yet another adjournment. It was at this stage that the learned Additional District Judge i.e. the Appellate Authority under the Rent Restriction Ordinance refused further adjournment The petitioner impugned this order, dated 8‑9‑1999 before the HonourableLahore High Court through the abovementioned Writ Petition No. 17177 of 1999 which was dismissed on 6‑2‑2002.

3. Since the learned Additional District Judge had allowed the petitioner to produce additional evidence at the appellate stage and since the said order had not been questioned by anyone therefore, we consider it in appropriate to go into the question of the desirability or validity of the order allowing such an opportunity to the petitioner‑tenant at a fairly late stage. Suffice it to say that this permission had been allowed to the petitioner almost three years ago but even today i.e. after a lapse of almost three years the petitioner is not equipped with the certified copies of the documents which he wished to produce as additional evidence. The possibility of the petitioner having initiated this exercise only to prolong the ejectment proceedings could not be ruled out. The conduct of the petitioner is evident from the fact that even after almost three years the petitioner is still not possessed of the evidence which he wished to adduce before the Court. No exception could, therefore, be taken to the order, dated 8‑9‑1999 passed by the learned Additional District Judge/Appellate Authority at Faisalabad or to the order, dated 6‑2‑2002 of the Honourable Lahore High Court passed in Writ Petition No. 17177 of .1999.

4. This petition is, therefore, without any merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. S.A.K./A‑206/S Petition dismissed.