| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1990 SLD 472 = 1990 MLD 337 |
First Appeal from order No.42 of 1985, decided on 13th September, 1989.
Presented By: Before Wali Muhammad Khan, J
Nasirul Mulk for Appellants. Muhammad Afzal Sadiq for
Respondent.
M. ALTAF HUSSAIN and 5 others--Appellants
VERSUS
PESHAWAR MOTORS LIMITED--Respondent
Law: Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963
Section: 17
Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963).- ---S.17--Personal requirement of landlord--Rent Controller is required only to see whether premises is required by landlord for his personal use in good faith- Rent Controller is not legally concerned to address himself on extraneous considerations--Dominant consideration has to be as to whether the landlord seeks eviction in good faith for his personal requirement--Rent Controller if satisfied about bona fide personal need of landlord has to order eviction irrespective of the consequences that may fall on the tenant--Rent Controller has not to consider the hardship caused to tenant as no such provision is provided in the statute by the Legislature--- Rent Controller has to restrict himself to the provisions of law and cannot import anything which is not there. Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)-- ---S.17--Personal requirement of landlord--Any r6ne of the landlords alone can seek the eviction of tenant on ground of personal bona fide need if his co -landlords do not object. Pervez Akhtar v. Dr. Muhammad Asim and others P L D 1988 SC 734 fol. Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)-- ---S.17--Default in payment of rent--Tenant instructing his Bank to pay Rs.3,000 as rent and-subsequently instructing payment of Rs.2,500--Directions to Bank to pay Rs.3,000 per month, held. was a binding contract so far rate of rent was concerned--Tenant, therefore, was legally bound to pay at the same rate thereafter and lesser payment by tenant made him a wilful defaulter, liable to be ejected. Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)-- ---S.17--Eviction of tenant sought on ground of causing damage to property by causing unauthorised alteration---Alleged construction by tenant apparently made during lifetime of the predecessor-in-interest of landlords--Acquiescence to such construction till his death, held disentitled his heirs to eject tenant. Nasirul Mulk for Appellants. Muhammad Afzal Sadiq for Respondent. Dates of hearing: 3rd June and 13th September. 1989. JUDGMENT This first appeal is directed against the order, dated 30-10-1985 passed by the Controller of Rents, Peshawar Cantonment…