2024 YLR 1981 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Full text

Sohail Niaz Khan VS Bilal Rizwan Ss. 19 & 22---eviction petition---Relationship of landlord and tenant, denial of---Failure to deposit rent---Effect---eviction orders were concurrently passed against the petitioner / tenant---Validity---Plea of the petitioner /tenant was that he was paying rent to the mother of the respondent (ejectment petitioner) after the demise of respondent's father, the original landlord---Validity---Record revealed that the petitioner had categorically admitted / acknowledged himself having been inducted and given possession of the rented premises as tenant albeit by father of the respondent through an oral tenancy---However, the pleadings ,submitted by the petitioner , showed no explanation as to what he did after demand of the respondent that the rent should be paid directly to him instead of his mother---No receipts had been referred by him (petitioner) to show that he had been continuously paying the rent to the mother of the respondent after the demise of the father of the respondent---Even otherwise, after the demise of the respondent's father the rented premises had devolved upon the respondent being the legal heir, which status of the respondent was neither denied nor disputed by the petitioner---Moreover, the petitioner, as a measure of showing his bona fide, neither approached the Rent Tribunal for deposit of rent to be paid to the lawful landlord/landowner nor any interpleader suit was filed, rather the petitioner had failed to deposit the rent even on the direction of the High Court (in instantproceedings); which indicated the dereliction, with audacity, on part of the petitioner that could not be countenanced---No gross illegality, misappreciation of record or procedural improprietycould be pointed out by the petitioner in the impugned eviction orders having been concurrently passed by the both the Courts below---Constitutional petition filed by the tenant was dismissed , in circumstances.