Eviction of Tenants and Legal Delay Tactics – A Judicial Precedent.
کرایہ داروں کی بے دخلی اور قانونی تاخیری حربے – ایک عدالتی نظیر
پس منظر
عدالتی فیصلہ
قانونی نکتہ
نتیجہ
Must read Judgement.
Citation Name : 2005 CLC 446 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Side Appellant : HAMAYUN through L.Rs.
Side Opponent : Mst. NAMWAR KHATOON through L.Rs.
---Ss. 13(6)---Ejectment of tenants was sought on the ground of reconstruction of the premises by landlady---Contentions of the tenants were that the property in dispute did not correspond to the one, for which the landlady had obtained the plan and in this regard, an application for adducing the additional evidence was moved with the Court of appeal, but the same was ignored and not decided; that the landlady had failed to make out a case for Re-construction of the property and that the demand for eviction was tainted with mala fide intentions, to seek the ejectment of the tenants and to rent out the same at enhanced rent or to dispose it of---Validity---Plea of tenants that the property in question was different from the one for which, the site plan was got sanctioned by the landlady, was not at all available to them; even if any such application raising the said plea was filed by them, which according to the tenants had not been considered by the Court, while passing the impugned order, the application was liable to be rejected simply for the reason that the Court below could not decide the plea by violating the order of the High Court passed while remanding the case to the said Court---Tenants had conceded, that no application for the additional evidence had been moved in the present appeal before the High Court, obviously the object behind the application was to further prolong the matter---Landlady admittedly was the owner of the suit property; she wanted to improve the property by spending money, for which site plan had been got approved; it was only for and on account of the delaying tactics used by the tenants, that since 1973 till this date, the possession could not be obtained by the landlady for the re-erection of her building; which if was not reconstructed by her, after getting the eviction of the tenants sufficient safeguards were provided by the law---High Court felt sorry for the landlady who kept waiting for the adjudication of her ejectment application by an administrative Tribunal, where simple and summary procedure was supposed to be applicable and then lost .her breath, yet the matter was lingering for the last 31 years and observed that present case was one of the most deplorable and sad nature of cases coming for adjudication, where the owner of the property had been yearning for such a long period, to seek the eviction of her tenant on the ground of Re-construction , to have full benefits and yield, of her improved property---Record showed that the tenants used all the delaying tactics and were successful in making the mockery of law and now again the plea, that the sanction plan did not correspond to the property in question had been raised, which was the continuity of the frivolous stance of the tenants and the obvious object was to further drag the matter on the score of additional evidence---Tenants were mainly responsible for delaying the matter; they were and are instrumental and were a hurdle in the way of the process of dispensation of justice, which when delayed was deemed to have been denied---High Court dismissed the appeal and Constitutional petition of the tenants as being without merits and imposed a special cost of Rs.25000 each which was hardly any compensation to the landlady side, who had suffered for such a long period of time.