2018 YLR 1818 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Full text

MUHAMMAD MUJAHID FAREED VS ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE Ss. 15, 22 & 13(1)(f)---Ejectment of tenant---Default in payment of rent and structural change by tenant in the demised premises without consent of landlord---Effect---Oral tenancy---Scope---eviction petition was allowed and application for leave to contest was dismissed---Contention of tenant was that he was regularly paying rent to the landlords---Validity---Demised premises was rented out to the tenant in August, 2014 through an oral agreement for two years---Tenant paid rent till April, 2015 but thereafter he became defaulter---Tenant despite expiry of period of tenancy did not vacate the premises in question nor paid rent since April, 2015---No written agreement between the parties existed with regard to construction over the rented premises---Construction over demised premises without written agreement or consent of landlord would be upon the risk and cost of tenant---Any structural change in rented premises without written consent of landlord was itself sufficient ground for eviction---Relationship of landlord and tenant had been admitted by the parties---Tenant had failed to show receipts of deposit of rent up to date---Courts below had rightly directed the tenant to vacate the demised premises and pay arrears of outstanding rent at the rate of Rs. 14000/- per month from May, 2014 till eviction---Concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below could not be interfered with in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---No mis-reading or non-reading of evidence had been pointed out in the impugned orders passed by the Courts below---Appraisal of evidence was the function of Courts below and if findings were based on proper appraisal of evidence then same could not be interfered with in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction---Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances.