Anwar Zaheer Jamali, CJ,--These Civil Appeals with leave of the Court are directed against the judgment dated 16.04,2015 passed by the learned single Judge in Chambers of the Lahore. High Court, Rawalpindi Bench in Writ Petition Nos. 2792 to 2801 and 2900 to 2909 of 2013, whereby these Writ Petitions were dismissed and consequently the orders of the two fora below dated 22.10.2012 and 04.10.2013, thereby dismissing the ejectment applications of the petitioner against the private Respondents, were maintained.
2. We have heard arguments of the learned ASCs for both the parties and with their assistance perused imaterial placed on record, which reveals that after the execution of registered sale deed dated 28.10.1999 (Ex.P.2), the present appellant had acquired title in the disputed property to the extent of 9 and 1/2 Marla, which was inherited by Mst. Zeenat, the widow of late Muhammad Afzal.
3.The learned ASCs for both the parties have admitted that the deceased Muhammad Afzal had left behind two sons, Javed Iqbal and Zafar Iqbal, four daughters and a widow, Mst. Zeenat. After purchase of share of Mst. Zeenat through registered sale deed as referred to above, the appellant has thus become co-owner in the estate left behind by late Muhammad Afzal. Plain reading of definition of 'landlord' clearly show that every co-owner in the property is landlord therefore in the instant case, the status of the appellant is of a co-owner landlady of the disputed property.
4.This being the position, the relatioriship of landlord and tenant is clearly established between the parties irrespective of other litigation, which may be pending between the appellant and other legal heirs of late Muhammad Afzal as regards the partition of the property or otherwise. In any case, in these circumstances, the orders of fora below, including the impugned judgment of the High Court are not sustainable in law in so far as finding to the extent of existence or non-existence of relationship, of landlord is concerned. Accordingly, these appeals are allowed, the findings of all the three fora below on the issue of relationship of landlord and tenant are set aside and it is held that since the appellant is one of the co-owners in the disputed property, which has not been yet partitioned, therefore, relationship of landlord and tenant between the appellant and respondents has been established. Consequently, the cases are remanded to the Rent Controller for further proceedings in the matter as regards other issues involved in the matter iri accordance with law.