MUHAMMAD FAZIL KIANI vs Raja SHAHBAZ KHAN
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by a landlord in a Cantonment area against the High Court's judgment setting aside the eviction of the tenant, which had been ordered on the ground of personal requirement. The core legal question concerns whether the High Court erred in requiring the landlord to establish his personal requirement as "indispensable," and whether the landlord's offer of a security undertaking to shift into the premises demonstrates bona fides. The Supreme Court held that the High Court's standard of "indispensable" requirement went beyond the legal requirement, and accepted the landlord's offer of a written security undertaking to occupy the premises within the statutory period as prima facie evidence of bona fides. Consequently, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal subject to the petitioner submitting the written undertaking.
- Does requiring a landlord to establish personal requirement as indispensable exceed the legal requirement for eviction?
- Can a landlord's offer of a security undertaking to occupy the premises establish bona fides in an ejectment matter?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by a landlord in a Cantonment area, against the acceptance by the High Court of tenant/respondent's appeal against eviction which was ordered on the ground of personal requirement of the petitioner.
2. According to learned counsel the case of the petitioner was that he was occupying a rented premises in Lahore while his other family members being in Rawalpindi he bona fide wanted to shift to Rawalpindi and occupy the premises in dispute. He has also contended that the approach of the learned Judge in the High Court requiring a landlord to establish the requirement or need as being "indispensable", is beyond the legal requirement. He has also, with respect, commented upon some other observations in the impugned judgment, as well.
3. ' In order to further establish his bona fides the learned counsel states that if the Court required, the petitioner offers security undertaking, that he would shift to Rawalpindi and occupy the premises in question within the statutory period if the respondent is ordered to be evicted with the further condition that he would not vacate the premises for as long a period as would be fixed by the respondent. Prima facie, there could not be any better offer from a landlord in a case like the present one to show his bona fides.
4. ' In the light of what has been stated above leave to appeal is granted subject to the petitioner's submitting an undertaking in the abovereferred terms in writing as soon as possible but in any case before the hearing of the appeal.
5. ' Security Rs,5,000.
6. ' The appeal shall be prepared on the present record; with, direction to the parties to file all additional documents, which would be necessary for its disposal.