MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH vs REHMAT ULLAH And Another
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal filed by a tenant against an order of ejectment. The respondent landlord sought the eviction of the petitioner from a shop on the grounds of personal bona fide requirement for his son. While the Rent Controller initially rejected the landlord's plea, the Additional District Judge, on appeal, accepted the claim and ordered the ejectment of the tenant. The High Court subsequently upheld the appellate order. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the concurrent findings of the appellate court and the High Court regarding the bona fide personal need of the landlord warranted interference. Upon reviewing the record and hearing counsel, the Supreme Court held that the order of the Additional District Judge was correct and proper. The Court found no grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings of the lower courts and consequently dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, affirming the ejectment order.
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact regarding a landlord's bona fide personal requirement for a rented shop?
- Is an appellate order for ejectment based on bona fide personal need subject to interference when upheld by the High Court?
ORDER
1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--This is a tenant's petition..
2. The petitioner is a tenant in a shop belonging to respondent` No.1. The said respondent sought the ejectment of the petitioner on the ground that the shop in question was required, bona fide, for the use of his son. Whereas the learned Rent Controller negatived this plea. The learned Additional District Judge, on appeal, accepted it and ordered the ejectment of petitioner. The High Court upheld the order of the Additional District Judge. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
4. We are of the opinion that the order of the learned Additional District Judge is correct and proper and no case for interference with his order is made out.
5. This petition is, accordingly, dismissed.