Sections 13 and 15 were sought on the basis of the personal needs of the landlord and his son. Who was employed and did not occupy an area with questions about the shops The record shows that other properties in the landlord's property were not vacant, no evidence on record by the tenant. Was brought in to determine that the landlord was not the son. The unemployed landlord did not need this shop for personal use and was told that the shop was not fit for personal use and the required business law prohibited any person from establishing a new business. Was banned despite the fact that he was walking. The other business owner can choose any of his or her own property for personal use. The second eviction request could have been sustained on any basis provided by section 13 of the West Pakistan Citizens Hire Ordinance, 1959, if later available to the landlord where there was no discrimination. The landlord's part, his application could not be dismissed on the ground that he had filed an eviction request on the basis provided by Section 13 of the West Pakistan Citizen Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959 and failed to prove the same. The landlord had proven in the shop that his son's appeal for personal and personal use and possession was dismissed.
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2012
