Mrs. HAFEEZA BEGUM vs ABDUL GHAFFAR
This matter arises from a petition seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Sindh, which dismissed the petitioner landlady's first appeal against the dismissal of her eviction petition. The original eviction petition sought the ejectment of the respondent from the demised premises on the grounds of default in rent, personal bona fide need, impairing utility, and nuisance, but was dismissed by the Rent Controller. The core legal question is whether the High Court failed to consider and adjudicate upon material issues raised in the appeal, specifically regarding bona fide personal need and impairing the value and utility of the property. The Supreme Court held that the impugned judgment of the High Court dealt only with the questions of default and nuisance while omitting any discussion on bona fide personal need and impairment of utility. Consequently, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine the petitioner's grievance regarding the unaddressed issues.
- Whether an appellate court is required to address all material issues raised in an ejectment matter?
- Does the failure of the High Court to discuss core issues like bona fide personal need warrant the grant of leave to appeal?
ORDER
' KHALIL-UR-REHMAN KHAN, J.---The petitioner filed an eviction petition seeking ejectment of the respondent from the demised premises of Property No.L126/1, Block 13-G, Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Karachi, on the ground of default in payment of rent, personal bona fide need, impairing the utility of the disputed premises and nuisance. Learned Rent Controller after framing necessary issues and recording the evidence of the, parties rejected the application vide order, dated 7-5-1991. The first appeal of the petitioner/landlady met the same fate vide judgment, dated 24-3-1998 passed by a learned Judge of the High Court of Sindh, Karachi. Hence this petition seeking leave to appeal on the grounds that the learned Rent Controller rejected the application without applying judicious mind to the evidence on record and also by non-reading and misreading of material piece of evidence specially on the question of bona fide personal need. It is also urged that the learned Judge of the High Court in the impugned judgment has failed to advert to the challenge made before him to the finding on the question of bona fide personal need, default in payment of rent and impairing value and utility of the property in dispute.
2. We have gone through the impugned judgment of the learned Judge of the High Court and find that only the questions of default and nuisance have been dealt with therein and there is no discussion with respect to the issue of bona fide personal need and the impairing the value and utility of the premises. Hence, grievance of the petitioner needs to be examined. Leave to appeal is, therefore, granted.