Pakistan Case Law
2011 CLC 846

MUNEER KHAN and another vs UZMA UFAQ and 3 others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2011 CLC 846
CourtIslamabad High Court
Case No.Writ Petition No,416 of 2011
Date2011-02-14
Judge(s)Muhammad Anwar Khan Kasi
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This writ petition challenges the concurrent judgments of the Rent Controller and the Additional District Judge, Islamabad, whereby an ejectment petition filed against the petitioners was accepted and the ejectment order was upheld. The core legal question concerns the maintainability of the ejectment petition and the existence of the relationship of landlord and tenant amidst disputed ownership involving the C.D.A. The Islamabad High Court dismissed the petition in limine, holding that the existence of a tenancy agreement and the admission of rent payment established the landlord-tenant relationship, and that the dispute between the landlord and C.D.A. was irrelevant to these proceedings. The court laid down the principle that once a tenant, always a tenant, and that disputed questions of fact cannot be re-examined under the constitutional writ jurisdiction pursuant to Article 199 of the Constitution.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether the High Court can interfere with concurrent findings of rent courts in exercise of its constitutional writ jurisdiction?
  • Does a dispute regarding ownership between a landlord and the C.D.A. affect the maintainability of an ejectment petition by the landlord?
  • Can a tenant deny the relationship of landlord and tenant after admitting to the execution of a tenancy agreement and payment of rent?
  • Whether a landlord is entitled to seek eviction of a premises for personal bona fide requirements when such requirement remains unrebutted during cross-examination?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Article 199 of the Constitution
writ petitionejectmentlandlord and tenantrelationship of landlord and tenantconstitutional jurisdictionconcurrent findingsbona fide requirement

ORDER

' MUHAMMAD ANWAR KHAN KASI, J.--- This Writ Petition challenges the judgments dated 26-1-2010 and 8-7-2010 passed by learned Rent Controller as well as learned Additional District Judge, Islamabad, respectively, whereby ejectment petition of the respondents Nos.1 and 2 was accepted and ejectment order was upheld by the learned Appellate Court.

2. The petitioners assail the Judgments on the ground that ownership of the property is controversial as the C.D.A. Claims to be the owner and has already cancelled the property from the names of respondents Nos.1 and 2.

3.. Both the courts below after perusal of evidence and on the basis of available record, accepted the eviction application and passed the ejectment order,

4. Admittedly, there exists a tenancy agreement between the parties, which was not extended after its expiry.

5. The petitioners in their written statement before the learned trial Court submitted that respondent No,1 (Haji Muhammad Zahoor)> had been regularly paying the rent to Dr. Zubair Azeem Butt, which means that relationship of landlord and tenant has not been specifically denied.

6. The ejectment petition was filed by the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 who are wife and sister-in-law of Dr. Zubair Azeem Butt, therefore, the eviction peation was maintainable.

7. So far as dispute between the landlord and C.D.A. Is concerned, that has got no relevancy over here as at the most, it can be dispute between a landlord and C.D.A. According to written statement of C.D.A. In inter pleader suit regarding the said shop, status of present petitioners has been questioned by stating that they got no cause of action or locus standi to file the petition. Even otherwise the disputed question of facts and evidence cannot be looked into under the writ jurisdiction of Article 199 of the Constitution.

8. It is an admitted position of law that once a tenant is always a tenant and no contradictory stand can be taken at the same time.

9. Personal bona fide requirements of the respondents Nos. 1 and 2/landlord has not been rebutted through cross-examination and landlords have got every right to get the premises vacated for personal bona fide use.

10. The learned courts below have dilated upon the issues. There are concurrent findings which need no interference in the writ jurisdiction. As such, petition beim devoid of merits, is dismissed in limine.

Cited by 7 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.