Mrs. SHAMIM FIRDOUS NIAZ vs IFTIKHAR AHMED SYED And 5 Other
This matter originated from an eviction petition filed by the deceased landlady, Chanda Begum, against the petitioner regarding residential premises, citing grounds of default, personal bona fide need, and nuisance. The Rent Controller granted the eviction order exclusively on the ground of personal requirement, a decision subsequently upheld by the High Court. The petitioner sought leave to appeal against the High Court's judgment. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the concurrent findings of the lower courts regarding the personal bona fide requirement of the premises by the respondents warranted interference. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the decision rested on findings of fact established by evidence on the record. The Court determined that there was no room for further re-appraisal of evidence at the appellate stage and that no substantial question of law had been raised to merit consideration. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, reaffirming the principle that concurrent findings of fact based on evidence are generally not subject to interference in further appeal.
- Can the Supreme Court re-appraise evidence in a rent matter where concurrent findings of fact have been reached by lower courts?
- Is a finding of personal bona fide requirement for residential premises considered a question of fact?
ORDER
S.A. NUSRAT, J.--The deceased Chanda Begum, applied for the eviction of the petitioner from the disputed residential premises on the grounds of default, personal bona fide need and nuisance. It was deposed by the husband of the applicant /respondent in the trial Court that the premises was required by the respondent /landlady for the occupation of her family which consisted of her husband, three sons and three daughters, all of whom were adults. It was further stated that two of the sons had completed their education and their marriages had to be arranged. Chanda Begum having died during the proceedings and her legal heirs were brought on the record and the learned Rent Controller allowed the application of eviction by order dated 1-9-1983 only on the ground of personal requirement. Petitioner's First Rent Appeal from the order of the Rent Controller having failed, leave to appeal is now sought from the judgment of the learned High Court.
2. We heard the learned counsel and have gone through the impugned judgment. The finding on the question of personal bona fide requirement of the respondents has been affirmed by the learned Judge in the High Court on the basis of evidence on the record. The decision in the case rests on findings of fact and there is no room for further re-appraisal of evidence at this stage. No question of law is raised in the petition, which merits no consideration. The same is dismissed accordingly. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.