| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 4151 = 2026 SLD 4151 = 2026 CLC 950 |
Balochistan High Court
F.A.Os. Nos. 19, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 of 2025, decided on 31st October, 2025.
Presented By: Muhammad Najam-ud-Din Mengal, J
Mian Badar e Munir for Appellants. Muhammad Javed Iqbal Kasi for
Respondents.
F.A.Os. Nos. 19, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 of 2025, decided on 31st October, 2025.
Presented By: Muhammad Najam-ud-Din Mengal, J
Mian Badar e Munir for Appellants. Muhammad Javed Iqbal Kasi for
Respondents.
AMIR RAZA BUTT and others ---Appellants
VERSUS
Haji SHAMS-UD-DIN and others ---Respondents
Law: Balochistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959
Section: 13(3)(a)(ii), 13(2)(vi)
Balochistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959) Ss. 13(3)(a)(ii) & 13(2)(vi)---Eviction petition---Personal bona fide need of landlord---Scope---Re-construction / erection of rented properties---Scope---Good faith and reasonableness, demonstration of---Pre-requisite---Sanction from municipal authority, statutory requirement of---Scope---Eviction of tenants, from rented shops in a market, was denied on the ground that the landlord (appellant ) failed to produce required sanction from municipal authority for re-construction---Validity---Record reflected that the ownership of the subject-property stood established through relevant mutations by duly exhibited documents showing transfer of title to the appellant---Even otherwise, the respondent, while deposing as witnesses , admitted that he had been depositing rent in the Court and such rent was withdrawn by the appellant through court order---Once rent is paid or deposited on behalf of the landlord and withdrawn by him under Court's permission, the relationship of landlord and tenant stands proved---Admittedly, the appellant sought eviction of the tenants from almost all shops of the market; such conduct explicitly showed that the appellant intended to vacate the entire building and reconstruct it into a new commercial plaza, rather than to occupy few shops for personal use---Thus, the case of the appellant did not fall within ambit of personal bonafide need under S.13(3)(a)(ii) of the Balochistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 ( the Ordinance 1959 ), but squarely fell under S.13(2)(vi) of the Ordinance, 1959---Since the intention of legislature is very much clear from the bare perusal of the relevant provisions of S.13(2)(vi) of the Ordinance, 1959, which makes it obligatory for the owner/landlord of the building to obtain necessary sanction for reconstruction from concerned municipal authority, at the time of filing of eviction application or even during its pendency---Moreover, the said statutory requirement explicitly shows that before seeking eviction for reconstruction, the landlord must demonstrate good faith and reasonableness of the requirement and also to produce the necessary…