Peerzada RAFIQ AHMAD vs Chaudhry ABDUL REHMAN
This matter arose from a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court, which upheld the decision of the Additional District Judge granting ejectment of the tenant from a residential house on the ground of the landlord's personal bona fide requirement. The Rent Controller had initially dismissed the landlord's ejectment application, holding that the true intention was to enhance the rent, as the rent had been increased incrementally over time. The Additional District Judge reversed this order, finding that the landlord independently proved his genuine personal need, which finding was maintained by the High Court. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, maintaining the eviction order. The Court affirmed the legal principle that a demand for higher rent or previous rent increases does not by itself undermine a landlord's claim of personal bona fide requirement if the factum of personal bona fide requirement is independently established by evidence on record.
- Does a demand for higher rent by itself negate a landlord's claim of personal bona fide requirement for ejectment of a tenant if personal requirement is independently proved?
ORDER
1. ' NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.-In this case, the landlord (respondent herein) had sought the ejectment of the petitioner from a residential house situated in Lahore (House No, 26, Hota Singh Road, Sant Nagar Lahore) on the ground of his personal use and damage to the property. The ground for damage to the property was later abandoned and the only ground pressed was that of personal need. The Rent Controller dismissed the application on the ground that the real object of the respondent in seeking the ejectment of the petitioner was to enhance the rent. This conclusion was arrived at on the basis of the submission made by the respondent that originally when the house in question was let out in 1962, the rent agreed to be paid between the parties was Rs, 65,per month and then it was raised to Rs, 85, per month, then to Rs, 90, per month and finally to Rs, 100, per month.
2. ' On appeal, the learned Additional District Judge relying on Badruddin Hasan Faruqui and others v.
3. Manghi Industrial Home (I), held that a demand of higher rent by itself does not cast any doubts about the personal bona fide requirements if the factum of bona fide requirements is independently proved. This requirement was, according to the learned Additional District Judge, proved by the evidence on the record, namely, that the petitioner was living in village Bahawalnagar and that he needed the house in dispute for his own personal residence. He, therefore, accepted the appeal and ordered the tenant to put the petitioner in possession. The tenant, therefore, moved the Lahore High Court by filing an appeal and the learned Judge in the High Court, after perusing the record agreed with the learned Additional District Judge that the respondent did indeed require the house for his personal requirement. The dictum in Badruddin Hasan Faruqui's case was approved.
4. ' Khawaja Mushtaq Ahmad on behalf of the tenant has again tried to press the contention that as the respondent had increased the rent, the object in seeking the ejectment of the petitioner was for the purpose of enhancement of the rent and the petition was, therefore, not bona fide. The learned Additional District Judge had recorded a finding of fact which the learned Judge in the High Court has upheld after perusing the record that the landlord did not require the house for his personal use and in his order noted this aspect of the case observing that "since this was a case of reversal of the order of dismissal of the application, therefore, I have examined the evidence myself in order to see whether the need of the respondent was bona fide.
5. We do not find any reason for interference and agree with the dictum contained in Badruddin Hasan Faruqui and others v. Manghi Industrial Home that a demand of higher rent by itself does not cast any doubts about the personal bona fide requirements if the factum of bona fide requirements is independently proved.
6. ' This petition is, therefore, dismissed hereby.
Cited by 36 cases
- Dr. HASSAN FATIMA Versus PAKISTAN RED CRESCENT SOCIETY 2026 SCMR 1303
- MOHAMMAD ZIAFAT Versus TARIQ NAWAZ KHAN TAREEN 2026 SCMR 1132
- Messrs ALKARAM TRAVELS (PVT.) LTD. and others vs EAST WEST INSURANCE 2001 SCMR 688
- Messrs AL-KARAM TRAVELS (PVT.) LTD. And Other vs EAST WEST INSURANCE K.L.R. 2001 S.C. 128
- ANIS AHMED and 7 others vs Messrs HABIB BANK LIMITED 1997 MLD 1
- ABDUL MAJEED SHAHID vs Syed ABDUL BASHIR 1993 CLC 148
- MUKHTAR HUSSAIN Versus MEHAR ELAHI 1992 MLD 318
- CHAUDHARY BROTHERS vs Mst. ASMA IRFAN 1991 CLC 937
- CAWAS A. NOSHIRWANI vs MRs, MEHER S. MOBED 1990 MLD 846
- ABDUL REHMAN vs SIRAJUDDIN 1990 MLD 754
- HABIB BANK LIMITED vs Dr. MUNAWAR ALI SIDDIQUI 1990 MLD 792
- Messrs HABIB BANK Ltd. vs HABIB COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY 1989 MLD 1162
- SHAUKAT HUSSAIN QURESHI vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE And Other 1989 MLD 4537
- Sh. MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM KOHLI vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, And OTHER 1989 CLC 49
- BEGUM ZARIN AZAM JAN vs MASOOD KHAN and 2 others 1987 MLD 3073
- Mian ABDUL REHMAN vs Syed IZHAR-UL-HASSAN RIZVI and others 1986 MLD 1574
- Messrs ALLIED BANK OF PAKISTAN Limited vs Syed WAHID HUSSAIN 1986 SCMR 946
- Syed INTISAR ALI vs AHMAD DIN KHAN 1986 MLD 1374
- Syed NAZIR HAIDER vs AMANULLAH 1986 MLD 347
- RAFIUDDIN AHMED KHAN vs Mst. NOOR JEHAN 1986 MLD 1606
- Mrs. J.C. REHMAN vs Mrs. SULTAN AHMAD 1985 CLC 2271
- Khawaja MUHAMMAD MUNAWAR vs NISAR AHMAD and 2 others 1985 CLC 1613
- MUHAMMAD FAZIL vs Sheikh MUHAMMAD YUSUF and another 1985 CLC 614
- ALLIED BANK OF PAKISTAN LTD vs Syed WAHID HUSAIN 1985 MLD 594
- ABUL MOKARRAM MUHAMMAD and 2 others vs Haji NAZIR AHMED KHAN 1984 MLD 938
- S. A . MIRZ A vs NISAR AHMED QURESHI 1984 MLD 23
- SHAH NA SIR RIZVI vs BEGUM SULTANA AHMED 1984 CLC 3098
- SULEMAN MOTALA vs TURAB ALI 1984 CLC 2469
- SOOFI IRSHAD AHMAD AND Anothers vs RAZA KAMAL MIR 1983 CLC 755
- MUSHTAQ AHMAD KHAN vs Khawaja MUSTAFAULHASAN 1984 CLC 3093
- ABDUL RAB SHAJI vs AFTAB AHMAD HASHIM Opponent 1983 CLC 2660
- S. M. ZAHOOR ALI ZAIDI vs Mst. AAREEMUNNISA JILLANI 1982 CLC 2579
- FAZAL ABBAS vs Shiakh A. SHAMIM 1982 CLC 1399
- S. ALAMDAR HUSSAIN KAZMI vs DR. SHAREEFUDDIN AHMED 1982 CLC 935
- Messrs AL-KARAM TRAVELS (PVT.) LTD. And Other vs EAST WEST INSURANCE K.L.R. 2001 S.C. 128
- IQBAL KAUSAR Versus ANISA JAFFERY 1986 CLC 1951