Section 17 Defending Tenants' Personal Needs of the Landlord Defending Tenants. There is a legitimate landlord and tenant relationship between the parties and the matter has been delayed by the tenants in an urgent manner which is required by law. Despite taking advantage of over 18/19 adjournments, the evidence and the tenant had no choice but to pass the restraining order of the tenants, which the court ordered. The rent controller under the law had adopted and provided legal procedure. Full / substantial opportunities to the tenants but they failed to present the proof The tenants' evidence was not identified in any order illegal, irregular or weak in the order in which the landlord was presented. No cross-checking was granted with regard to duplication. Cannot be considered as a piece of evidence by the tenants and based on their personal and critical need to start a business in the demolished premises to evict the tenant so that the landlord can trade. Or proof of business experience was not necessary to prove his personal need. In such premises, the landlord was not in possession of any other property in the area that was fit for his need and need. The sole testimony of the landlord was sufficient to establish his personal and very good need for the landlord's statement and his testimony on the oath was consistent with the actions taken in the removal request, contradicting such statements. There was nothing on record that the tenants did guard B.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015
