2022 MLD 961 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Full text

MUHAMMAD ZAMAN VS HAMEEDULLAH S.13---Ejectment application for 3 shops was filed by the Landlord/appellant on grounds of wilful default and personal bona fide need---Respondent (tenant) contested the application on ground that neither the appellant was owner of property nor respondent had ever been inducted as tenant of appellant; that another person was actual owner of the shops in question; that respondents were employees of said another person; and that he (the other person) filed suit for correction of mutation entries---eviction application was dismissed by Rent Controller---Validity---Record transpired that the appellant produced rent agreements and produced marginal witnesses who confirmed the factum of rent agreements---Oath Commissioner produced the rent agreements---Appellant also produced halqa Patwari who produced record showing that appellant, his mother and sisters were owners of the land in question---Respondents neither produced any sale deed in order to confirm the factum of sale/purchase in favour of said other person---Mere bald assertion could not rebut the document---Respondents' witnesses admitted in cross-examination that the suit land was still in the name of appellant in the revenue record---Respondents had no other capacity for retaining possession than as tenant---Pendency of suit for specific performance of the agreement was no ground to avoid eviction of the tenant by the Rent Controller---Law did not impose any embargo on landlord to establish any business but sole testimony of landlord was sufficient to establish personal bona fide need---Appeal was accepted accordingly.