Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K‑60 of 1979, decided on 18th April 1979.
(On appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Sind dated the 18th of December, 1978 in 2nd Appeal No. 524 of 1971).
---O. XLI, r. 27 (1) (b)‑Appeal‑Additional evidence, production of‑High Court obtaining affidavits to elucidate certain facts tending to favour petitioner‑High Court delivering very elaborate and well‑reasoned judgment and no material defect pointed out in such judgment‑Objection to reliance by High Court on such affidavits during hearing of second appeal, held, not tenable and case not fit for grant of leave to appeal‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 183 (3).
Syed Inayat Ali, Advocate anti Vakli Ahmad Kidwai, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing : 18th April 1979.
‑This petition is directed against an order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court dated the 18th of December 1978 dismissing the petitioner's second appeal in a rent case.
The facts of the case briefly are that Abdul Aziz Mirza (landlord) filed ail application for the ejectment of Sh. Khurshid Ahmad (petitioner) on the ground of default in the payment of rent and also bona fide requirement of the house for his personal use and the use of his children. The learned Rent Controller dismissed the application. The first appeal filed by the legal heirs of Abdul Aziz (deceased) was also dismissed. A second appeal was thereupon filed by the respondents in the High Court. The learned High Court Judge found that default in the payment of rent had not been proved. But in view of the size of the family of the landlords (respondents herein) the learned High Court Judge felt that the premises was bona fide needed by there for personal use.
The learned counsel for the petitioner objected that the learned High Court Judge had relied on evidence received by him during the hearing of the second appeal, in the shape of affidavits of Khurshid Ahmad and Shaukat Mirza. We are of the view that the learned High Court Judge had obtained these affidavits to elucidate certain facts which might have, favoured the petitioner/tenant. The learned High Court has delivered a very elaborate and well‑reasoned judgment. No material defect has been pointed out in the same. We do not therefore consider it to be a fit case for grant of leave. The petition is dismissed.
The petitioner is however granted four months' time to vacate the premises in question, subject to regular payment of monthly rent.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer