| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2002 SLG 1133 2002 SLD 1133 2002 SCMR 241 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal Nos. 127-K, 128, 132 to 137 and 155 to 168-K of 2001, decision dated: 25-05-2001
RANA BHAGWANDAS AND SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, JJ
R.F. Virjee, Advocate Supreme Court and Akblaq A. Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in C.P. No. 127K of 2001). M.G. Dastgir, Advocate Supreme Court and Akhlaq A. Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in C.P. No. 128K of 2001). Abdul Lati
Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal Nos. 127-K, 128, 132 to 137 and 155 to 168-K of 2001, decision dated: 25-05-2001
RANA BHAGWANDAS AND SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, JJ
R.F. Virjee, Advocate Supreme Court and Akblaq A. Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in C.P. No. 127K of 2001). M.G. Dastgir, Advocate Supreme Court and Akhlaq A. Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in C.P. No. 128K of 2001). Abdul Lati
JEHANGIR RUSTAM KAKALIA through Legal HeirS
VS
Messrs HASHWANI SALES & SERVICES (PVT.) LIMITED
Law:
Section:
(a) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)---S. 15(2)(vii)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.23---Bona fide personal need of landlord---Imposing of restriction on landlord on use of his property---Validity---Landlord being owner of demised premises cannot be deprived of his rights and interest to use his property in a manner more suited to his requirements---No unreasonable restriction can be placed on exercise of right by landlord which would offend the fundamental rights guaranteed under Art.23 of the Constitution. (b) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S. 15(2)(vi)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)--Reconstruction---Concurrent findings of facts by the Courts below--Satisfaction of Rent Controller---Premises was required by landlord for reconstruction and its building plan had been approved---Rent Controller as well as the high Court had recorded concurrent findings of fact after careful consideration of evidence adduced by both the parties---Validity---Where satisfaction of Rent Controller was borne out by the material available on record and findings of fact backed by satisfactory evidence recorded by him, High Court while concurring with the view taken by the Court of first instance did not appear to have suffered from misreading or non-reading of evidence---Judgment passed by High Court did not suffer from misconstruction of law or violation of statutory provisions governing the matter in issue---Tenants failed to displace the conclusions drawn by both the Courts that the requirement of the premises by landlord was bona fide and reasonable, as no element of mala fides or dishonest motive could be spelled out from the evidence---Supreme Court declined to interfere with -the , s passed by the Courts below---Leave to appeal was refused. Attomal v. Allah Bux PLD 1985 Kar. 650; Abdul Ghaffar v. Gulrez Pasha 1989 CLC 260; A.G. Securities v. Vaughan and others PSCC 756; Bashir Hussain v. Muhammad Saeed PLJ 1977 Lah. 158; Hashwani Sales and Services Limited v. Karachi Building Control Authority and 15 others PLD 1986 Kar. 393; Mst. Akhtar Jehan Begum and 4 others v. Muhammad Azam Khan PLD 1983 SC 1; Karachi Building…
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