Law: Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009

Section: 4, 22(1), 22(6), 23, 25(1), 25(5)

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 110

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984

Section:

Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Section:

 Summary The High Court allowed the constitutional petition and set aside the concurrent judgments of the Rent Tribunal and Appellate Court, holding that the respondent failed to establish the essential relationship of landlord and tenant, which is a jurisdictional prerequisite under the Punjab Rented Premises Act, 2009. The respondent sought eviction and recovery of rent on the basis of an alleged oral tenancy and relied upon incidental findings recorded in an earlier declaratory suit concerning ownership of the property. The Court held that the ejectment petition lacked material particulars of the alleged oral tenancy, including the date, terms, mode of payment, witnesses, and other essential facts. It further ruled that incidental observations regarding tenancy in previous civil litigation could not substitute for independent proof of tenancy in rent proceedings. Since the existence of a landlord-tenant relationship was not established, the Rent Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain the ejectment petition. The Court also held that the claim for arrears of rent extending over twenty-four years was barred by limitation beyond three years. Consequently, the impugned judgments were set aside and the ejectment petition was dismissed as not maintainable. Tagline The Rent Tribunal acquires jurisdiction only upon proof of a landlord-tenant relationship; incidental findings in previous civil litigation cannot establish oral tenancy, and arrears of rent beyond three years are barred by limitation. ORDER; ABID HUSSAIN CHATTHA, J. This constitutional Petition is directed against the impugned Judgments & Memo of Costs dated 18.12.2024 and 19.05.2025 passed by Special Judge (Rent) and Additional District Judge, Lahore, respectively, whereby, Ejectment Petition filed by Respondent No. 1 (the “Respondent”) against the Petitioner and Proforma Respondents No. 4 & 5 was concurrently allowed while dismissing the application for leave to contest of the latter by directing to vacate the possession of the demised premises within two months from the date of eviction order and pay arrears of rent since June, 2001 @ Rs. 34,916/- per month till handing…