2015 YLR 1714 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Full text

WALI BHAI VS DISTRICT JUDGE, HYDERABAD 1991 SCMR 2300, PLD 1973 SC 236, PLD 1975 SC 331, PLD 1982 SC 465, PLD 2001 SC 514, Constitutional petition--TERM , Ejectment of tenant--Term , Lease agreement--Rule , Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984--117 , Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984--132 , Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984--2 , Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979--15 , Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance 1979--2 , Ss. 15 & 2(h)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts.2(1) (c), 132(2) & 117---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Ejectment of tenant---Demised premises, a hotel---Lease agreement---Default in payment of rent---Personal bona fide need of landlord---Ejectment of tenant was ordered---Validity---Landlord was bound to prove the existence of fact that the provisions of relevant laws were applicable to the "premises" in question when tenant had denied that building in question was not the "premises"---Landlord had not led any evidence to prove that the premises was let out for a purpose other than a hotel and same was subsequently converted into a hotel---Findings of Rent Controller with regard to jurisdiction were contrary to evidence which were result of misinterpreting and non-reading of evidence---Jurisdiction of Rent Controller was barred, as premises was a hotel---Rent Controller in the facts of present case had no jurisdiction to entertain the ejectment application with regard to the "premises" of a hotel---Courts below had not only ignored the evidence of landlord but also failed to properly appreciate the contents of lease agreement---Concurrent findings of both the courts below were not based on proper appraisal of evidence and due application of law---Both the courts below had misapplied the Law of Evidence placed on record by the tenant that premises had been used as a hotel---Courts below ought to have inferred on the basis of documentary evidence that the premises had always been a "hotel" contrary to their findings that same had been subsequently converted into hotel which was neither the case of landlord nor any evidence had been led to such effect---Unchallenged statement of tenant should have been given full credit by the Rent Controller--- Rent Controller had unlawfully assumed the jurisdiction which was barred with regard to "hotel" premises---Order of Rent Controller was without jurisdiction and void---Jurisdiction could neither be conferred nor taken away by the parties or by their conduct or even by their consent---Order passed by a tribunal or court without jurisdiction was always void and nullity in law---Findings recorded by both the courts below were set aside and eviction petition was dismissed---Constitutional petition was accepted accordingly.