1. ' This appeal under section 21 of Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 has been filed against the Order of XII Senior Civil Judge and Rent Controller, Karachi, dated 22nd August,1982, whereby he ordered ejectment of Rahim/tenant.
2. ' Briefly the facts are that Khairunnisa Landlady (hereinafter referred to as respondent) is owner of the House No,85/16-17 and New No,GRE-469/8, situated behind Aijaz Colony, Lawrence Road,Karachi, and Rahim (hereinafter referred to as appellant) is tenant from March 1969 at the monthly rent of Rs,80.
3. ' On 1st October,1974, the respondent filed application under section 13(2)(3) of the Sind Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 in which she prayed for possession of the house on various grounds including for bona fide personal use. On 18th March,1975, the learned Rent Controller framed two issues and taking into consideration the evidence came to the conclusion that appellant had not committed default in the payment of rent but held that respondent requires the premises for her personal use, therefore, he directed the appellant to hand over vacant possession of premises to respondent within two months of passing the order.
4. ' Mr.Nooruddin M.Ramzan, the learned counsel for appellant contended that the respondent is not in need of premises for personal use but she wants to sell the house which is evident from notice, dated 18th April,1973 (which was given 17(seventeen) months prior to filing of this rent application) and have been using third degree methods for getting the possession of the house. He has further submitted that it was necessary for landlady to have appeared and given evidence before Rent Controller. He has relied upon 1979 CLC 367.
5. ' Mr.Zafarul Haque, the learned counsel for the respondent contended that the respondent and her husband used to reside in rented house from where they have been ejected by the Rent Controller after filing this Rent Application and that after eviction they are living in a rented premises which are not sufficient for the family. He has also argued that the evidence of Attorney of husband of Pardanashin lady is competent for which he has relied upon P L 0 1983 Lah.
6. 320.
7. ' Before the Rent Controller, Mr.Syed Abul Hadi, husband of respondent being her attorney was examined on 17th January,1980 and he has stated that respondent with her husband and children is residing in a rented two Room Flat in Al-Azam Square, Sharaf Abad, Karachi and before acquiring present premises they used to live in rented House B-259 Sharaf Abad, Karachi from where the respondent's family was evicted under the Court order due to non-payment of rent. He has filed certified copy of High Court Order, dated 1st September; 1975 passed in Rent Appeal No,198/1975 which is at page 33 and Annexure '8' in Rent Case. He has further stated that he is 66 years and passing retired life and is ill and is not in a position to continue in rented premises and that accommodation where he is living is not sufficient for a family consisting of husband, son and five daughters. He also in proof produced photostat copies of Identity Cards marked Annexures 'C' and '0' about their old ages. He has also stated that they had no other house.
8. ' Appellant in his evidence before the Rent Controller stated that he used to pay rent regularly and respondent does not require premises for personal bona fide need and respondents want to sell the premises. He has also stated that respondent made application to Martial Law Authority on 8th August,1977 against the appellant but he was saved from vacating the premises.
9. ' The main point on which the learned counsel for appellant stressed that respondent wants to sell the property and reliance is being placed on notice, dated 18th April,1973 Annexure 'H' in Rent proceeding. In my view may be that time respondent might have thought to sell the premises but she had not filed rent application but in good faith in terms of agreement she was demanding the premises. Again legal notice after lapse of about 16 (sixteen) months i,e, on 13th September, 1974 was sent to appellant Annexure 'E' where it has clearly been stated that owner of the house has filed rent case of ejectment against respondent as such she needs her own premises for her personal bona fide use, therefore, notice and admission about the notice, dated 18th April,1973 in evidence are not relevant.
10. It has been established that respondents have been living in rented house and during the pendency of her rent case she was in 1975 evicted by landlord as per High Court Order mentioned above and again family consisting of 6 members took a flat on rent which is not sufficient. It has been held in a case Muhammad Hanif v. Mst. Sara P L 0 1982 Kar. 182, that a landlord's desire to live in his or her own house is natural moreso where he or she will monetarily be benefited therefrom.
11. ' Supreme Court in a case Abdul Latif v. Faqir Mohammad 1982 SCMR 1046 observed that landlord is justified in requiring his own premises for personal use and there are so many recent decisions on this point in favour of landlord.
12. ' For the reasons discussed above, in my opinion the respondent has duly proved his requirement in good faith of the premises. I find that order passed by the Rent Controller does not require interferences. Accordingly I dismiss the appeal and allow three months time to vacate the premises and hand over possession thereof to the respondent. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.