Case Details

Citation(s)
1994 SLG 1542 1994 SLD 1542 = 1994 PLD 57

First Rent Appeal No. 161 of 1986, decided on 23rd May, 1993
Abdul Rahim Kazi, J

HAROON through his Legal Heirs---Appellant

VERSUS

Mst. AMINA---Respondent

Law:

Section:

This rent appeal has been filed challenging the orders passed by the learned First Senior Civil Judge and Rent Controller, Hyderabad in Rent Case No.360 of 1984.   The case of the respondent is that she owns a portion of property bearing House No.161653/1 Khambati Ghitti, Hyderabad and a house consisting of one room on first floor is occupied by the deceased Haroon appellant who is survived by his L.Rs. the present appellants. The grounds taken for ejectment of the tenant Haroon in the said application were that he is a defaulter in payment of rent, he had caused damage to the premises in dispute and that the premises were required by the respondent for the use of her daughter Mst. Mumtaz. The deceased tenant Haroon denied the claim of the respondent in his written objections. On these pleadings of the parties the following points for determination were settled by the learned Rent Controller:   Point No.l Whether the opponent has committed default in payment of rent from April, 1978? Point No.2. Whether the opponent has damaged the disputed premises? Point No.3 Whether the applicant requires the disputed premises? Point No.4 What should the order be?   The respondent filed her affidavit-in-evidence and that of her daughter Mumtaz while the deceased Haroon had filed his own affidavit-inevidence. All of them were crossexamined and the learned Rent Controller answered the first two points in favour of the tenant while answering the third point on the ground of requirement for personal use of the daughter of the landlady, the application for ejectment was allowed and the tenants were ordered to be ejected. Being aggrieved the present appellants have preferred this appeal. I have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.   The only point for consideration in the present matter is whether the premises in dispute are required in good faith for the personal use of Mst. Mumtaz, the daughter off the present respondent/landlady.   Mr. Riaz Ahmed, Advocate for the appellants has argued that at the time when this rent case was filed the said Mumtaz was only a student in Liaquat Medical College, Hyderabad, by now, after lapse of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register