| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2013 SLG 2574 2013 SLD 2574 2013 YLR 1200 |
Sindh High Court
C.P. No. S-182 of 2010, decided on 21st December, 2012. DATEof hearing: 18th December, 2012
SYED MUHAMMAD FAROOQ SHAH, J
Mrs. Razia Ali Zaman for Petitioners. Ghulam Muhammad Shad for
Respondents
C.P. No. S-182 of 2010, decided on 21st December, 2012. DATEof hearing: 18th December, 2012
SYED MUHAMMAD FAROOQ SHAH, J
Mrs. Razia Ali Zaman for Petitioners. Ghulam Muhammad Shad for
Respondents
MUHAMAMD SIDDIQUE and anothersVsMUHAMMAD RIAZ and another
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Concurrent findings of fact by courts below--- Scope--- High Court in Constitutional jurisdiction cannot interfere with such findings particularly when no illegality or impropriety is pointed out. (b) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S.15---Ejectment of tenant---Default in payment of rent---Proof---Shifting of onus to prove---Applicability---Non-payment of rent is a negative aspect and if landlord appears in court and states on oath that he has not received rent for certain period, it would be sufficient to discharge burden that lies under law upon him and onus then shifts to tenant to prove affirmatively that he had paid or tendered rent for period in question. Allahdin v. Habib PLD 1982 SC 465 and Alifdin v. Khadim Hussain 1980 SCMR 767 rel. (c) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S. 15---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Ejectment of tenant---Bona fide personal need of landlords---Proof---Ejectment application filed on the ground of bona fide personal need of landlords and default in payment of monthly rent was allowed by both the courts below---Validity---Real test whether premises was required for personal use was whether need was based on good faith---Such being a question of fact and finding on the subject could not be taken exception to unless it was shown that it suffered from violations of some fundamental legal principle in the matter of appreciation of evidence or omission of evidence or misreading of evidence---Nothing solid or concrete evidence could be brought on record in rebuttal by tenants showing that need of landlords was imaginary or based on mala fide---Tenants failed to show any illegality, gross irregularity or infirmity in findings recorded by both the courts below---Landlords successfully established on record that concurrent findings recorded by two courts below were in accordance with law and evidence available on record which were sustainable on record and were maintained---Petition was dismissed in circumstances. PLD 1995 Lah. 470; 2004 MLD 587; 2003 SCMR 1398; Sulleman v. Karim PLD 1986 Kar.…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492