Case Details

Citation(s)
1981 SLG 3160 = 1981 SLD 3160 = 1981 SCMR 785
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 22 of 1975, decided on 19th March, 1980. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court dated 27th November 1974 in S. A. O. 318 of 1974).
Presented By: Dorab Patel and Nasim Hasan Shah, JJ
Kh. Mushtaq Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.

Sheikh FAZALUR REHMAN-Petitioner

VERSUS

Mian MUHAMMAD AFZAL, ETC.-Respondents

Law: West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)

Section: 13

West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959)  S. 13-Landlord and tenant, relationship of-None of respondents appearing in witness-box to give evidence in support of their claim of being owners of shops in question and to have leased them to petitioner but petitioner admitting to have paid rent in respect of such shops to respondents-Burden, in circumstances, held, lay very heavily on petitioner to prove respondents having not been owners of such shops.-[Burden of proof]. Date of hearing ; 19th March, 1986.                                                                                                                                                    ORDER DORAH PATEL, J.-The petitioner is the tenant of two shops in Lyallpur, for which he had paid rent for many years to the respondents, who are brothers. However, be suddenly stopped paying rent, therefore, in 1971, the respondents filed an eviction application against him on the ground of default in the payment of rent and on another ground which is not relevant. The petitioner contested his eviction and the eviction application was dismissed by the Rent Controller, Lyallpur, by his order dated 20th November, 1972. Therefore, the respondents challenged this order in an appeal in the District Court, Lyallpur, which was allowed by an Additional District Judge on 20th November, 1974. As his eviction was ordered by the learned Additional District Judge, the petitioner challeng ed the judgment passed against him in a second appeal in the Labor High Court, which was dismissed in limine by a learned Single Judge on 27th November 1974. Hence this petition for leave. Learned counsel admitted that the petitioner had been in heavy arrears of rent at the date of the eviction application, but he drew our attention to the fact that the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register