Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 435 2020 SLD 435 2020 CLC 392
Sindh High Court
Constitution Petition No. S-2651 of 2017, decision dated: 17-11-2018. Hearing dated: 12-10-2018.
FAHIM AHMED SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Iftikhar Javed Qazi
Respondent(s) by: Shahida Jatoi No. 1. Nemo Nos.2 and 3.

FAHIM AHMED SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE MUHAMMAD SHAMSHAD SULAIMAN

VS

MST. ALMAS BEGUM AND 2 OTHERS

Law: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)

Section: 15,15(2)(vii)

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 86,87

(a) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)---- ----S. 15---Ejectment petition---Bona fide personal need of landlord---Non-mentioning of good faith by the landlord---Effect---Where landlord was willing to get vacated rented premises without good faith, application of landlord would not be allowed on ground of personal need---If the Rent Tribunal had mentioned in his findings "good faith" of "personal need" of landlord; word "bona fide" was not necessary to be mentioned as said word was synonyms with "good faith". (b) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S.15---Ejectment petition---Bona fide personal need of landlord---Contention that landlady did not require the demised premises in good faith but wanted to sell as such purpose did not amount to bona fide need---Validity---Point of selling the premises by landlady was not taken by tenant before two forums below---No such intention was mentioned by landlady in her affidavit in evidence, wherein she had taken plea that she needed the premises to house her daughter---Landlady was not cross-examined on that point; tenant could not take refuge from something mentioned in the pleadings---Landlady was a retired ailing old lady as such her intention that she needed her daughter to be settled in demised premises, appeared to be coherent and reasonable---Owner could sell her/his property at any moment even without getting the same vacated---No doubt under Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, rented premises could not be vacated solely on ground of selling the same but it was nowhere mentioned in the said Ordinance that after getting the premises vacated owner could not sell the same---Landlady had established her personal need---Findings of two courts below did not require any interference. PLD 1981 SC 246 rel. (c) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S. 15---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Preamble---Application of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 to proceedings under Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979---Scope---Application under the Ordinance could not be equated with plaint of civil suit---Provisions of C.P.C. were not applicable to the same. (d) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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