1998 MLD 911 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Full text

FAZAL BIBI VS MUNIR AHMAD 1981 CLC 1091, 1983 CLC 241, 1987 SCMR 307, 1989 SCMR 1366, 1995 CLC 931, West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959--15 , --Ss. 13 & 15---Ejectment of tenant---Bona fide personal need of landlords--Essentials---Evidence produced by landlords, proved beyond doubt their personal need, who wanted to start their own business in rented premises as they had no other place to carry on the same---Evidence on record clearly indicated that landlords did not have any other business---Landlords in order to seek eviction of tenant on ground of personal need were merely required to make statement on oath, in conformity with their pleadings, to prove their need--Statement disclosing need of landlords, not shaken in cross-examination, was considered to be important evidence which could not be overlooked or brushed aside for any extraneous reasons, particularly when material on record, and preponderance of evidence were leaning in favour of landlords---Order of Rent Controller was based on factors which were neither relevant nor material in considering question of bona fides and good faith---Owning residential house by landlords and non-disclosure of financial resources had nothing to do with personal need of landlords---Where statement made on oath was consistent and credibility thereof was not shaken, while material on record and circumstances Of case had a tilt in favour of upholding plea of landlords, then matter had to be examined on basis of protection in terms of S.13 of the Ordinance which provides salutary check to protect tenant against any mala fide eviction--Landlords having proved their bona fide need independently without shadow of any doubt, findings recorded by two Courts below suffered from misreading, non-reading of evidence and non-consideration of material facts, and therefore, such findings were reversed---Cross-objections of tenant relating 'to quantum of rent was also dismissed on the ground that while claiming tenancy on the basis of decision of union of traders, he was also bound to accept quantum of rent fixed by them as affirmed by Courts below---Tenant was directed to hand over vacant possession of shop in question to landlords.