Mst. SHARIFA KHATOON vs ANISUR REHMAN And Another
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Sindh High Court, which had set aside an ejectment order previously issued by the Rent Controller. The Rent Controller had originally ordered the respondent's ejectment based on findings that the premises were sublet and that the landlady bona fide required the property for her personal use. Upon appeal, the High Court reversed these findings of fact and dismissed the landlady's application. The Supreme Court, upon reviewing the record and hearing counsel, determined that the High Court's appreciation of the evidence was inconsistent with established legal principles. Consequently, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and directed that the appeal be heard on the existing record, while permitting the parties to file additional documents. The case establishes that appellate courts must adhere to settled principles when re-evaluating findings of fact made by a Rent Controller, particularly regarding evidence of subletting and personal requirement.
- Does the High Court have the authority to reverse findings of fact made by a Rent Controller regarding subletting and personal requirement?
- Is the appreciation of evidence by the High Court in rent matters subject to review by the Supreme Court?
- Can a party file additional documents during an appeal before the Supreme Court?
ORDER
1. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of a 'learned Judge of Sind High Court, dated 7-10-1985 by which an appeal of the first respondent herein was allowed with the result that order of ejectment passed by the Rent Controller against him was set aside.
2. The Rent Controller passed the order of ejectment on being satisfied from the evidence produced before him that the respondent had sublet the premises and the petitioner-landlady also bona fide, required the premises for her personal use. Learned Judge, however, on appeal reversed the finding of fact and in result dismissed petitioner's application.
3. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in the light of the record before us we find force in the submission made by him the appreciation of evidence made by the learned Judge in the High Court is not in consonance with the principles laid down by this Court. We, therefore, grant leave and allow the petition. Security Rs.500.
4. The appeal will be heard on the present record at an early date It is, however, open to the parties to file additional documents, if any