WAFA ULLAH vs M.M. ZAHID And Other
This matter arises from an ejectment petition filed by the respondent landlord against a tenant in respect of a commercial shop. The Rent Controller ordered ejectment, which was upheld in appeal by the Additional District Judge and subsequently challenged through a constitutional writ petition in the High Court by the tenant. During the writ proceedings, the petitioner, claiming to be a business partner and nephew of the tenant, filed an application to be impleaded as a party, which the High Court dismissed alongside the main writ petition. Following the dismissal, the landlord initiated execution proceedings, prompting the petitioner to file an objection petition claiming independent possession, which was rejected by the executing court and appellate authorities. The core legal question concerned whether a sub-tenant or alleged partner could obstruct execution proceedings of a valid ejectment order obtained against the primary tenant. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner's attempt to cling to the property was mala fide and dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, affirming the lower courts' concurrent findings.
- Whether an alleged business partner of a tenant can be impleaded as a party in a writ petition challenging an ejectment order?
- Can a third party obstruct execution proceedings of an ejectment order by claiming independent possession through a mala fide objection petition?
- Order I Rule 10, Code of Civil Procedure 1908
ORDER
NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--The facts, which form the background, are that M.M. Zahid, respondent No. 1, filed an ejectment petition for ejectment of Zia Ullah respondent No. 2 from Shop No. 25, McLeod Road, Lahore on 3-10-1979. The said ejectment petition was accepted by the learned Rent Controller, vide order, dated 11-1-1984. The said order was questioned by an appeal before the Additional District Judge by Zia Ullah dismissed on 9-7-1984. Zia Ullah then filed Court (Writ Petition No. 3835 of 1984), on 29-8-1984. During the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner herein (Wafa Ullah) submitted an application under Order I, rule 10, C.P.C. On 13-5-1985 for being impleaded as a party in the said writ petition. Wafa Ullah is a nephew of Zia Ullah and both were conducting business in the shop as partners. The High Court dismissed the writ petition of Zia Ullah on 27-5-1985 and also rejected the application of Wafa Ullah to be made a party in that writ petition.
2. The landlord, M.M. Zahid, then started execution proceeding in order to secure vacant possession of the shop. In these proceedings, Wafa Ullah submitted an objection petition that he was in possession of the disputed property in his own right and could not be evicted under the ejectment order passed against Zia Ullah. This objection petition was rejected by the Executing Court. He then filed an appeal against that order before the Additional District Judge, Lahore, who in a detailed and elaborate order, upheld the order of the Executing Court but gave four months' time to him to put landlord in possession of the premises. The said order of the learned Additional District Judge was challenged through a writ petition in the High Court which failed. Hence this petition for leave to appeal in this Court.
3. We have heard Mr. M. Iqbal, learned counsel for the petitioner at great length in support of this petition.
4. We agree with the view of the learned Additional District Judge that the attempt of Wafa Ullah (petitioner herein) to cling to the property cannot be upheld and that his objection petition was mala fide.
5. There is no force in this petition which is dismissed hereby.