Find a Lawyer

TAHIR UMAR versus BATA SHOE (PAKISTAN) LIMITED

West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959 Section 13 Eviction based on personal use and occupation of houses by the landlord because the shop adjacent to him and his brother has been taken into account, disclosing the fact and Owner did not appear to have occupied another shop, he was not entitled to vacate the shop. The landlord may not have been in exclusive possession of another shop, but his family was not barred from leaving the store for the purpose of launching an independent business appeal forum; personal use and occupation of the landlord. In view of the question of, the landlord failed to execute the petition without valid basis, because under an agreement, after the death of his father, the other partners relinquished their rights in the tenancy and Allowing them to occupy the premises for their use The grounds were not viable for the landlord and were not Rough contrary to the law declared by higher courts but also suffered to consider material evidence famous supreme court advocate from Ali Chak lawyer