2023 MLD 1958 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Full text

SAJID IQBAL SHEIKH VS ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE Ss. 10 & 19---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 42---eviction of tenant---Oral tenancy agreement---Suit for specific performance with respect to subject property filed by the tenent---Tenant denied existence of relationship of landlord and tenant---Rent Tribunal dismissed the eviction petition filed by the respondent/landlord, however, the Appellate Court accepted the same---Petitioner/tenant claimed to be in possession of the demised-premises on the basis of an agreement to sell allegedly having been executed by the father of respondent/landlord---Validity---Agreement-in-question had been denied by the respondent/ landlord---Although a suit for specific performance of said agreement had been filed by the petitioner/tenant which was subjudice before the Civil Court , however, his claim/plea was yet to be proved, whereas the title of the respondent/landlord over the demised premises was not disputed---Owner of the property by virtue of said title would be presumed to be landlord and the person in possession of the same would be construed as tenant---Tenancy agreement was not necessarily required to be in writing rather the same could be oral and implied---Even otherwise, suit of specific performance was subsequently instituted by the petitioner/tenant after the eviction petition having already been filed---Section 10 of the Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009 ('the Act 2009') clearly indicated that any other agreement between the landlord and tenant did not affect their relationship inter se unless the tenancy agreement had been revoked---Nothing was available on record to suggest that the oral tenancy agreement was revoked prior to execution of agreement to sell alleged by the petitioner/tenant---Petitioner/tenant was obliged to vacate the demised property under the circumstances, which (possession) would be restored to him in case of success in his civil suit pending adjudication before the Civil Court---Appellate Court had rightly accepted the eviction petition of the respondent/landlord---Constitutional petition was dis-missed in limine, in circumstances.