MIRZA SUGAR MILLS LTD Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH
This appeal under section 24 of the Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963 calls in question the order of the Additional Rent Controller, Lahore Cantonment, dated 27th June, 1991, whereby he accepted an application for eviction filed by respondent against the appellant under section 17 of the Cantonments Rent Restriction Act, 1963.
2. In his written reply, the respondent had denied the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, which led to the framing of the following issue:
(1) Whether there exists a relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties? O.P.P.
3. The respondent in support of his case examined himself as his own witness and produced P.T.D. as Exh.P.1. In rebuttal the appellant examined R:W.1 Barkat Masih, R.W. 2 Kartar Masih and appeared himself as R.W.3. The record of another ejectment petition filed by the respondent against one of his tenants was produced as Exh.R.1. By virtue of the impugned order the issue was decided in favour of the respondent; the appellant was held to be a tenant under him and an order of ejectment was passed against him,
4. The arguments of the learned counsel for the parties have been heard at some length in this appeal. During the course of arguments, both the learned counsel have agreed that the evidence on the record is deficient and no satisfactory decision can be arrived at on the question involved in this appeal. A Both the learned counsel further agreed that the matter may be remitted to the Additional Rent Controller, Lahore Cantonment for decision afresh after allowing the parties to adduce additional evidence in support of their respective contentions.
As a result of what has been stated above this appeal is allowed and the impugned order of the Additional Rent Controller is set aside with the result that the application for eviction fled by the respondent against the appellant shall be deemed to be pending before the Additional Rent Controller, Lahore Cantonment who shall decide the same afresh after allowing the parties to lead evidence as they may desire.
The parties shall appear before the Additional Rent Controller on 23rd of February, 1992.
As the ejectment petition has remained pending for the last about 4 years, it is directed that the case shall be decided afresh by the Additional Rent, Controller by or before 31st of March, 1992.
No order as to costs. The record shall be remitted to the Additional Rent Controller, Lahore Cantonment at once.
H.B.T./C‑3/L Appeal allowed.