MUHAMMAD AFZAL vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND Other
The petitioner sought special leave to appeal against concurrent orders of eviction passed by the Rent Controller, the Additional District Judge, and the High Court. The core legal question was whether the concurrent findings of fact regarding the petitioner's default in rent payment and the landlord's bona fide personal requirement for the property justified interference by the Supreme Court. The Court held that the case was concluded by factual findings and that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any error of law in the appreciation of evidence by the lower courts. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal. However, the Court granted the petitioner one month to vacate the premises, subject to the undertaking that the petitioner would voluntarily surrender possession and continue to pay rent during this period. The judgment reaffirms the principle that the Supreme Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact in rent matters unless a clear violation of law or misappreciation of evidence is established.
- Does the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact regarding rent default and bona fide personal requirement in a rent case?
- Can a tenant be granted additional time to vacate premises after the dismissal of a petition for leave to appeal?
ORDER
KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN, J.-The petitioner was directed to be evicted from the property in dispute by the learned Rent Controller vide his order dated 12-11-1980.
2. The petitioner filed an appeal which also met the same fate and was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge on 25-4-1981.
3. The petitioner then filed a constitutional petition being W. P. 2988/81 which was dismissed by the High Court on 23-9-1981.
4. The petitioner has now come up in a petition for special leave to appeal against the aforesaid orders to this Court.
5. We have heard the learned counsel and gone through the record. We must say that the case is concluded by factual finding regarding the default on the part of the petitioner in the payment of rent and the bona fide requirement of the landlord for personal use of, the property for his son.
Learned counsel has not been able to point out any violation of law in the matter of appreciation of evidence by the Courts below, and in the circumstances we feel that this is not a fit case for grant of leave to appeal.
6. The result is that the petition is dismissed hereby. However learned counsel prayed for grant of one month's time to enable his client to vacate the property, whereafter, he undertook, that the petitioner would voluntarily surrender its possession to the landlord and will also continue paying rent. The petitioner is granted one month's time on the above conditions.
Cited by 1 case
- Syed ASHRAF ALI vs ABDUL RASHID 1984 CLC 2632