Law: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance 1959.

Section: 13

  West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)--- ---- S. 13 (3) (ii) --- Personal bona fide requirement --- Landlord was not required either to mention in his ejectment application the details of business which was sought by him to so up in premises nor the landlord was required to have obtained training in business which he intended to establish in the tenanted premises --- Landlord was also not required to establish that he possessed sufficient funds to establish business in premises in dispute. Haji Mohibullah & Co. and others v. Khawaja Bahauddin 1990 S C M R 1070 and Mehdi Hasan v. Muhammad Saeed Chandna 1982 C L C 1003 ref. West Pakist4it Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)--- S. 13, (2) (ii) --- Personal bona ride requirement --- Prerogative of landlord to decide that a particular property would be suitable for purpose of running his business ---Neither Rent Controller nor tenant could raise any objection in that behalf. Khuda Bakhsh v. Additional District Judge and another 1982 C L C 202 and Ahdul Qadus v. District Judge, Sialkot and others 1982 C L C 23.55 ref. Ch. Muhammad Yamin for Petitioners. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 2nd March, 1991. JUDGMENT This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, assails the judgment of the Additional District Judge, Gujranwala, dated 24th July, 1984, whereby he accepted the appeal filed by respondent No.1 and set aside the, order of the Rent Controller dated 21st of June, 1983.   On 3rd of September, 1981, Muhammad Sharif and others, petitioners herein, riled an application under Section 13 of the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 against the respondent with respect to shop situate in Gujranwala, seeking his eviction on the grounds that he was a defaulter and the shop was required by petitioner No.4 Muhammad Aslam, for his own use and occupation. This application was resisted by respondent No.1 by Filing a written reply in which he denied the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and also controverted the allegations regarding default and personal use. On the pleadings of the parties, the learned…