2012 SCMR 854 SUPREME-COURT
Supreme Court · 2012
Full text
MUHAMMAD AJMAL KHAN VS RASHID SHAFIQUE 1980 SCMR 593, PLD 1982 SC 218, Eviction of tenant--TERM , West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959--13 , S. 13---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---eviction of tenant---Landlords (petitioners), sought eviction of tenant (respondent) on the grounds of demolition and reconstruction of the building and personal bona fide need---Ejectment application of landlords was dismissed by Rent Controller, Appellate Court and High Court on the grounds that claim of demolition and reconstruction of the building was not bona fide; that period for permission for reconstruction accorded by competent authority had expired and same was not renewed by the landlords, and that plea of personal need also was not bona fide as two of the landlords were settled abroad---Validity---Landlords had categorically urged the ground of demolition of building and its reconstruction as a whole, including the area of the two shops in possession of tenant, and in support of their plea they had also produced the requisite permission for construction and building plans, approved by the competent authority---To support the claim of personal bona fide need , one of the landlords appeared in the witness box in his personal capt'city and deposed in unequivocal terms about their personal bona fide need, and such statement on oath remained consistent with the assertions made in the eviction application and also remained un-shuttered in the cross-examination---Fact that two other shops were lying vacant in the building, which were not let out by the landlords since long should have been taken as a positive factor in their favour to prove their bona fide, but same to the misfortune of the landlords was considered as a negative factor to conclude that eviction on grounds of personal need was not bona fide---Section 13(2)(vi) of West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, made it obligatory for the owner/landlord of the building to obtain necessary sanction for reconstruction or erection from the relevant authorities at the time of filing of eviction application or even during its pendency, but S.13(2)(vi) did not require it to be renewed again and again before starting the actual process of reconstruction of the building after obtaining its physical possession from the tenant---Once the landlords had obtained approval of their building plans and permission for reconstruction from the competent authority they were not required to get it renewed again and again till the final eviction order was passed and they were able to secure possession---Irrespective of the condition of the building, it was the sole prerogative of the owners of a building/landlords to decide whether they wanted to demolish and reconstruct the same as per their choice and suitability---Perusal of site plan of the building revealed that two shops were in the possession of the tenant, while another shop was in the possession of another tenant, and major portion of ground floor and upper floors of the building were stated to be in the exclusive possession of the landlords---Such factual background made it inconceivable and hard to believe that eviction application filed by the landlords on the ground of reconstruction was mala fide, as they had to demolish not only the two shops in possession of tenant , but also other portions of the building, including the vacant shops in their possession---Mere fact that two of the landlords were abroad since long was no ground for questioning their bona fide---Section 13(4) & (5) of West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, provided sufficient safeguards to protect the interests of the tenant, and the Rent Controller and courts below could not have arbitrarily proceeded to form a contrary view regarding reasonableness, good faith/bona fide of the landlords, overlooking said provisions of law---Supreme Court converted petition for leave to appeal into appeal, set aside impugned judgments and eviction application of landlords was allowed on the grounds of reconstruction and personal need.
