Law: Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979

Section: 15

Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979) --- S. 15(2)(vii) --- Personal bona fide requirement --- Out of two adjacent shops, which were rented out to different tenants, one was already got vacated by landlord while the other was also claimed by him for personal requirement of his son who intended to carry on business of general store-One shop being already available to landlord and no further details having been given to justify requirement in respect of both the shops, Rent Controller was justified in rejecting pica of personal requirement in respect of shop in dispute. Farooq H. Naek for, Appellants. Hussain Adil Khatri for Respondent. Dates of Hearing: 16th, 30th September and 28th October, 1990. JUDGMENT The appellant riled application for ejectment of the respondent in respect of Shop No.1 situated on ground floor of the Building No.568-C, Central Commercial Area, Block 11, Khushal Road, P.E.C.H.S. Karachi. According to the appellant there was originally one shop but it was converted into two shops and one was rented out to the respondent and the other to another tenant. It was alleged that the shop is required in good faith for the occupation and use of her son Hilal-uddin who intends to start his business of general merchant-cum -medical store. The appellant and her son reside in upper portion of the said building. It was also alleged that the respondent has defaulted in payment of rent from June 1985 till October, 1985 but this issue has not been pressed in appeal. The respondent denied the averments made in the application. The learned Controller on assessment of evidence dismissed (lie ejectment application. Mr. Farooq H. Nack the learned counsel for the appellant.- has contended that the premises is bona fide and in good faith required by the appellant. The claim is in respect of both the shops which are adjacent. One of them 'was rented out to   respondent and the other one to Roshan H. Nanjee. The appellant wants both the shops for carrying on business by her son. In the other case namely F.R.A. No.881/1988 ejectment of the tenant has been allowed ' (in the ground that he has made…