SAEED MIAN ANSARI AND Another vs AQEEL AHMAD SIDDIQUI
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Sind High Court, which upheld an order for the ejectment of the petitioner from a residential property in Karachi. The core legal question was whether the lower courts erred in their findings regarding the landlord's grounds for eviction, specifically default in rent payment, unauthorized subletting, and the landlord's personal requirement for the premises. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the findings of the Rent Controller and the High Court were supported by evidence. The Rent Controller had determined that the landlord’s personal requirement was bona fide, noting that the landlord was currently residing in his mother's house with a large number of family members. The Court found that the petitioner's counsel failed to demonstrate any evidence or legal error that would warrant interference with the concurrent findings of the lower courts. Consequently, the petition for leave to appeal was dismissed, affirming the ejectment order based on the established bona fide personal need of the landlord.
- Can a tenant challenge an ejectment order based on personal requirement if the landlord's need is found to be bona fide by the Rent Controller?
- Does the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts in rent matters where no evidence of error is shown?
ORDER
1. MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHAN, J--Petitioner Saeed Mian Ansari seeks leave to appeal against the judgment and order of the Sind High Court dated 24-5-1983 passed in First rent Appeal No. 455 of 1981 regarding his ejectment from House No. 103, Block No. I8, Federal `B' Area, Karachi.
2. Respondent/landlord sought ejectment on three grounds firstly that the petitioner had committed default in the payment of rent ; secondly he had sublet the house and lastly he (respondent) required the house in question for his personal need. The learned Rent Controller found that the requirement of the landlord was bona fide and he was living in his mother' house with large number of other members of his family. Learned counsel failed to point out any evidence to interfere with the finding` the Courts below. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Cited by 3 cases
- (Mst.) GHAZALA YASMEEN vs MUAHMMAD RAFIQUE K.L.R 1995 Civil Cases 304
- Mst. GHAZALA YASMEEN vs MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE 1995 PLD Karachi 171
- NUSRATULLAH vs QURESH AHMAD 1992 CLC 2508