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. 404 of 1979, decided on 28th May, 1979.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court dated 9-4-1979 in S. A. O. No. 475-70/BWP).
S. 13(3) (a). (ii)-Personal requirement-Landlord's father allegedly dying 4/5 years earlier resulting in devolution of some shops by way of inheritance on landlord-Contention that fact of landlord owning some other shops as well would react on finding of bona fide personal need of landlord--Landlord's father having died 4/5 years ago but no such plea as raised at present stage having been raised before High Court where matter remained pending from 1970 to April 1979, case, held, not a fit case for allowing petitioner to raise aforesaid plea and even otherwise fact of bona fide personal requirement having been found to be duly established by Courts below, no ground existed fox grant of leave to appeal - Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3).
M. Afzaal Watto, Advocate with Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing : 28th May, 1979.
The dispute in this case is about a shop bearing No. 57/1 situated in Haroon Bazar, Bahawalnagar. Abdul Majid, hereinafter called the landlord, filed an application against the present petitioners for their eviction on the ground that he needed the shop for his personal use. The application was rejected by the learned Rent Controller on 29-7-1970.
2. The landlord filed an appeal which was accepted by the learned District Judge on 13-11-1970 and he set aside the order of the learned Rent controller and ordered eviction of the tenants/petitioner.
3. The tenants/petitioners filed a second appeal being S. A. O. No. 475/ 70/BWP, which was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court (Bahawalpur Circuit) on 9-4-1979. The petitioners-tenants have come up in a petition for special leave to appeal against the same to this Court.
4. The only point argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner was that 4/5 years ago Abdul Aziz father of the landlord Abdul Majid died as a result whereof some shop or shops of the deceased devolved b way of inheritance on Abdul Majid landlord. Requesting us to take notice of the subsequent development, it was argued that the fact that now the landlord was owner of some other shops as well, would react on the finding of the bona fide personal need of the landlord and for this reason he submitted that the orders of the Courts below should be set aside. The contention has no merit. According to the very submission, the father of the landlord died 4/5 years ago, but, strangely enough, no such plea was raised before the High Court where the matter remained pending from year 1970 upto 9-4-1979 during which period the petitioners enjoyed the fruits of a stay order which had been obtained by them. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that this is not a fit case nor even a fit stage for allowing the petitioners to raise the plea aforesaid. As on the findings recorded by the learned District Judge and the High Court, the bona fide personal need of the landlord stands' duly established on the record, there exists no ground for grant of any special leave to the petitioners.
5. The result is that this petition has no merit and is dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer