| Case ID |
517bd0fc-f2fd-42d0-9d16-e00a3cb4b9e2 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
D-2741 of 2016 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 16, 2014 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Sindh High Court upheld the decision of the appellate court, concluding that the respondents had successfully demonstrated their bona fide need for the demised premises for establishing their independent Homeopathic Clinic. The court found that the petitioner, despite contesting the execution of the second rent agreement, failed to provide evidence supporting his claims. The court ruled that the non-service of a notice under Section 18 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance was not a bar to the respondents' eviction petition, particularly since the landlord-tenant relationship was acknowledged by the petitioner. The constitutional petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was directed to vacate the premises within 90 days. |
| Summary |
In the case adjudicated by the Sindh High Court, the focus was on the eviction petition filed under the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. The key issue revolved around the bona fide personal need of the landlords, who sought to reclaim possession of their demised premises for establishing their independent Homeopathic Clinic. The court evaluated the evidentiary submissions from both parties, highlighting the significance of the landlord-tenant relationship, the execution of rent agreements, and the legal requirements for eviction. Ultimately, the High Court upheld the appellate court's decision, emphasizing the landlords' rights under Article 23 of the Constitution of Pakistan, which protects property rights. The court ruled that the non-service of notice under Section 18 was not detrimental to the landlords' case as the tenant acknowledged the landlords as rightful owners. This case illustrates the judicial interpretation of personal bona fide need and the procedural aspects of landlord-tenant disputes, reinforcing the legal framework provided by the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance. This judgment serves as a vital reference for similar cases involving eviction and tenant rights in Pakistan. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
SHAHNAWAZ TARIQ, JUSTICE,
MUDASIR ILLAHI
|
| Lawyers |
T. David Lawrence for Petitioner,
Rehan Khan Durrani for Respondents Nos.1 and 2,
Agha Ather Hussain Pathan, Asstt. A.G. for Respondent No. 3
|
| Petitioners |
Mudasir Illahi
|
| Respondents |
2 others,
Farooque Ahmed Khan
|
| Citations |
2016 SLD 3601,
2016 CLC 1871
|
| Other Citations |
1998 SCMR 819,
1993 CLC 2370,
2004 SCMR 578,
2010 MLD 665,
2008 SCMR 398,
1992 SCMR 46,
1995 CLC 3014,
2012 CLC 793,
1989 SCMR 1366,
Shezan Limited v. Abdul Ghaffar and others 1992 SCMR 2400,
Messer General Services Corporation v. Messer Pakistan National Shipping Corporation 1987 MLD 2149,
Iqbal Book Depot and others v. Khatib Ahmed and 6 others 2001 SCMR 1197,
Jahangir Rustam Kakalia through legal heirs v. M/s Hashwani Sales and Services (Pvt.) Ltd. 2002 SCMR 241,
M/s F.K. Ibrami & Co v. Begum Begoza 1996 SCMR 1178,
Qamaruddin through his L.Rs. v. Hakeem Mehmood Khan 1988 SCMR 819,
S.M. Nooruddin and 9 others v. Saga Printers 1998 SCMR 2119
|
| Laws Involved |
Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979),
Constitution of Pakistan
|
| Sections |
15(2)(vii),
16,
18,
Art.23,
Art.199
|