| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 2621 2004 SLD 2621 2004 PLD 62 |
Peshawar High Court
First Appeal from Order No. 160 of 2001, decided on 22nd July, 2003. DATE of hearing: 30th June, 2003
IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, J
Syed Asif Shah for Appellant. Zahid Aman Khan for
Respondent
First Appeal from Order No. 160 of 2001, decided on 22nd July, 2003. DATE of hearing: 30th June, 2003
IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, J
Syed Asif Shah for Appellant. Zahid Aman Khan for
Respondent
MANZOOR ELAHI
VS
Mst. SURRAYA JABIN
Law: Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963
Section: 17,24,17(2)(vi),17(2),17(9)
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
Section: 117,120,133
(a) Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)----- ----Ss. 17 & 24---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 117 & 120--Bona fide personal need of landlady---Onus to prove---Son of landlady appeared as her attorney before Rent Controller and fully substantiated her claim---Attorney was subjected to the test of lengthy and searching cross-examination to shatter his testimony but nothing favourable could be elicited from him---Other witnesses examined on behalf of the landlady had also supported her claim---Rent Controller allowed the ejecetment application and passed eviction order against tenant--Validity ---Qualitative evidence existed to establish that rented premises were required by the landlady in good faith. and her demand was genuine---Burden to prove her bona fides and good faith was upon the landlady and §he had discharged the same to the satisfaction of the Rent Controller---High Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction declined to interfere with the eviction order passed by the Rent Controller. (b) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)----- ----Art. 133---Examination of witness---Omission to cross-examine witness on material part of his evidence---Presumption--Such omission gives rise to inference that truth of his statement has been accepted--Unchallenged statement of witness should be given full credit and usually accepted as true unless displaced by reliable, cogent and clear evidence. (c) Cantonments Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963)---- ----S. 17---Bona fide personal need of landlady---Non-appearance of landlady in witness-box---Plea raised by the tenant was that the landlady had been appearing before Sub-Registrar in her property matters--Effect---Such non-appearance would not reflect adversely on her claim for possession---No absolute rule existed that in every case landlord must appear in person in support of his claim because exceptions can always be there in cases where on account of some unavoidable circumstances it was not possible for the landlord to enter in the witness-box to support his plea---Legitimate cause and reason for a suitor could be there to give for non-appearance in the case meaning thereby that some reason was…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492