2023 PLD 411 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Full text

MUHAMMAD SALIK ATHAR VS MUHAMMAD OBAID S.15---eviction of tenant---Willful default in payment of rent---Bona fide personal need---Relationship of landlord and tenant, denial of---Sale-agreement---Goodwill/Pagri---Scope---Concurrent findings were passed against the tenant---Contention of the petitioner/tenant was that he was lawful purchaser/owner of the demised premises under sale-agreement having paid huge amount of sale-consideration to the respondent/landlord---Validity---Sale-agreement was not a title agreement but, at the most, a right to sue for such title or rights arising out of such agreement---Such rights never came to an end even if order of ejectment was recorded in Rent jurisdiction nor such order could legally cause any prejudice to legal entitlement of the purchaser if he would succeed in such lis---Attorney of the petitioner/tenant, however, had admitted that suit for specific performance filed by the petitioner against the respondent /landlord had been rejected by the Court of competent jurisdiction---Even contents of the sale-agreement mentioned that the payment was being made as part-payment towards "total goodwill sale amount" in respect of demised premises---Term 'goodwill' was not recognized under provisions of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 (' the Ordinance 1979'), however, the superior Courts had equated the same with term "Pagri"---Plea of tenant that he had paid goodwill for premises , in no manner, could succeed as a ground of defence when eviction of tenant was being sought by the landlord---Goodwill amount, if be presumed in the present case, was paid in respect of demised premises, even then it would not debar the respondent/landlord to seek eviction of the petitioner on the ground of personal bona fide need---Evidence of the respondent/landlord regarding his bona fide need remained unshaken---Such claim was not specifically denied by the petitioner/tenant---Mere bald denial of relationship, therefore, by the petitioner without any cogent evidence could not be given any weight---Default of even a day was sufficient to entitle the landlord for ejectment of tenant from the demised premises---No illegality or infirmity was noticed in the impugned judgments and orders passed by both the Courts below, constitutional petition was dismissed in limine, in circumstances.