Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1770 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAMZAN vs Mian MUHAMMAD WAQAS S

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1770 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAMZAN VS Mian MUHAMMAD WAQAS S.13---Eviction of the tenant---Personal bona fide need of the landlord---Scope and proof---Rent Tribunal dismissed the eviction application of the respondent/ landlord ,however, Appellate Court accepted the appeal and ordered eviction on the basis of personal bona fide need---Contention of the petitioners / tenants was that the suit-shops were actually not required by the landlord for his personal bona fide need, instead he had an inclination to re-let the shops to other persons which amounted to infringement of statutory safeguard to original tenants---Validity---Landlord could not seek eviction on whims and desire only and his need should be bona fide, but , at the same time, bona fide need should not be so absolute and compelling which if not fulfilled , the landlord would suffer misery or irreparable loss; the bona fide need of the landlord laid somewhere in between---It was the landlord who was the best judge to really assess such need and make his planning while applying eviction before the Court---If respondent/ landlord was of the opinion that the suit-shops would be required for the bona fide need of his own, or his children or grand-children in future, then his solitary statement was sufficient in said regard---It was to be left to the choice of the landlord to determine suitability of the premises although he might be owner of other premises as well---Landlord had complete option to choose from one of the several tenements occupied by tenant to avail the personal requirement and the said discretion was not assailable, exception being the rarest cases of bad faith---Proof of the bona fide need of the landlord stood discharged the moment he had , while appearing in the witness-box, made such statement on oath or in the form of an affidavit-in-evidence as prescribed by law , if the same remained un-shattered in cross-examination as well as un-rebutted in the evidence adduced by the opposing party ---No illegality or infirmity was found in the impugned judgment passed by the appellate Court directing eviction of the petitioners /tenants on the basis of personal bona fide need of the respondent / landlord--- Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances . Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1770 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAMZAN VS Mian MUHAMMAD WAQAS S. 13---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Eviction proceedings---Well reasoned judgment passed by the Appellate Court---Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court, invoking of---Scope---Appellate Court had declared the bona fide need of the landlord / respondent as genuine after taking into consideration sufficient reasons---Such findings of the Appellate Court were based upon elaborate, careful and correct appraisal of evidence and did not suffer from any mis-reading of evidence---Findings of the Appellate Court without any illegality or infirmity could not warrant interference by the High Court in its constitutional jurisdiction---It was not the mandate of the High Court in constitutional jurisdiction to substitute its own findings for the findings recorded by the Appellate Court after due appraisal of evidence---Party approaching the High Court under its constitutional jurisdiction had to demonstrate gross mis-reading or non-reading of evidence or any jurisdictional defect floating on the surface , but in the present case said pre-conditions were missing---No illegality or infirmity was found in the impugned judgment passed by the Appellate Court directing eviction of the petitioners/tenants on the basis of personal bona fide need of the respondent/landlord---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1770 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAMZAN VS Mian MUHAMMAD WAQAS Ss. 13(2)(iv), 13(3)(a)(i), (ii) & 13(4)---Eviction of the tenant---Personal bona fide need of the landlord---Restoration of the evicted tenant---Scope---Contention of the petitioners/tenants was that the suit-shops were actually not required by the landlord for his personal bona fide need, instead he had an inclination to re-let to other persons which amounted to infringement of statutory safeguard to original tenants---Validity---Section 13(4) of the West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 ('the Ordinance 1959') stipulated a statutory safeguard in case(s) where a landlord having secured possession of premises for the purpose of his own occupation or his family's use subsequently did not do the same---Section 13(4) of the Ordinance 1959 had entitled the tenant to move the Rent Controller for restoration to him and on being satisfied of the requirement of said provision, the Rent Controller was obliged to make an order accordingly---Although the provisions envisaged in section 13 of the Ordinance 1959 stipulated eviction of tenant on various grounds , however, the eviction ordered under clause (iv) of the subsection (2) or under sub-paragraphs (i) and (ii) of paragraph (a) of subsection (3) to said S.13 was reversible if the condition which had led to the said eviction, were not satisfied within the prescribed time---If the tenant was dispossessed on the ground that the landlord or his children required the rented premises for his or their occupation whereas he or they did not occupy the said premises or after having occupied the same re-let the same within two months of taking over the possession thereof, then Rent Controller , on being approached, could straight away direct that the evicted tenant be put back into possession of the property-in-question---No illegality or infirmity was found in the impugned judgment passed by the appellate Court directing eviction of the petitioners /tenants on the basis of personal bona fide need of the respondent/landlord---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1770 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAMZAN VS Mian MUHAMMAD WAQAS S. 13---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Eviction proceedings---Factual controversy, determination of---Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court---Scope---While exercising constitutional jurisdiction, High Court will not enter into factual controversies which have already been dealt by a competent Court of law vested with statutory powers, particularly when there is no jurisdictional error or other legal infirmities such as arbitrariness and others in the order assailed before the High Court ---No illegality or infirmity was found in the impugned judgment passed by the Appellate Court directing eviction of the petitioners/tenants on the basis of personal bona fide need of the respondent/landlord---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1770 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD RAMZAN vs Mian MUHAMMAD WAQAS S — 2023 CLC 1770 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 CLC