| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1994 SLG 1512 1994 SLD 1512 = 1994 PLD 84 |
Quetta High Court
First Appeal from Order No.15 of 1994, decided on 25th May, 1994.
Presented By: Before Munawar Ahmad Mirza, CJ
Syed Mumtaz Hussain Baqri for Appellant Mohsin Javed for
Respondents.
First Appeal from Order No.15 of 1994, decided on 25th May, 1994.
Presented By: Before Munawar Ahmad Mirza, CJ
Syed Mumtaz Hussain Baqri for Appellant Mohsin Javed for
Respondents.
Syed HAQ NAWAZ---Appellant
VERSUS
Mst. SAKINA and 9 others---Respondents
Law: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959.
Section: 13
West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)-- ----S. 13---Bona fide personal need of landlord---Landlord seeking eviction of tenant from two shops and one godown---No material was bought on record suggestive in the testimony of witnesses which might convincingly substantiate bona fide requirement pertaining to second shop or godown---Evidence on record merely depicted requirement for one shop only---Nothing was available on record to prove intention of commencing, business at larger scale than before or insufficiency of one' shop---Effect- --Where demised premises consisted of three units, landlord would be obliged to prove through independent and reliable evidence, bona fide requirement concerning each unit of demised premises---Necessity of landlord showing bona fides regarding each unit of non-residential building appeared to be more essential for consequent upon such proof, established business of occupant had to be destabilized-- Bona fides concerning single' shop only had been established---Tenant, however, offered to vacate one shop and godown voluntarily---Landlord on basis of evidence on record and the offered concession by tenant would be entitled to get possession of one shop and godown. Abdul Manan and others v. Mir Nawaz Khan and others 1989 CLC 2277; PLD 1985 SC 1996 and 1990 SCMR 544 ref. West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)--- ----S. 13---Bona fide personal need of landlord---Quantum of proof---Mere demand or anxiety for enhancement of rent by itself would not affect bona fide personal requirement of premises by landlord---Burden would lie upon landlord to justify on basis of tangible factors his bona fide requirement for whole building from where eviction was sought---Landlord could not merely bank on the lacunas of other side, but evidence brought on record must satisfactorily establish his claim. PLD 1985 SC 1996 and 1990 SCMR 544 rel, West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)--- ----S. 15----Appellate Authority ---Scope and powers---Power and scope of appellate jurisdiction are considerably wide---Whole case and real controversy between parties become open for…