MUHAMMAD SHARIF Versus NISAR AHMAD

1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑ Leave to appeal has been sought by a tenant in a rent restriction matter against the dismissal of his Constitutional petition by the High Court.

2. The petitioner has been ordered to be evicted on the ground of personal requirement of the landlords.

3. Learned counsel has raised three contentions: (i) that the respondents have other shops belonging to them. They, therefore, could have sought eviction of the petitioner on the ground of personal requirement, (ii) that it was not mentioned in the application for eviction that the landlords had other shops; (iii) and that there is no assertion on their behalf that the other shops were not suitable for the expansion of their business.

4. After hearing the learned counsel, we are satisfied that the defects in the pleadings of the parties or conduct of the lawyer at the time of examination and cross‑examination of the witnesses would not make any difference in so far as the finding of fact regarding the bona fide personal requirement of the respondents is concerned. Leave to appeal accordingly is refused.

5. M.B.A./M‑498/S Leave refused.