On 29th September, 1986 a petition under section 13 of the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959 seeking the eviction of the petitioner from property bearing No. P-274-A, Commercial Area, Peoples Colony No. 1, Faisalabad was filed by Muhammad Ashraf respondent No. 1, herein, in which he claimed to be the landlord of the property on account of its purchase from Muhammad Siddique, son of Rehmat A.I, the original owner. The ejectment was sought on the grounds of default in the payment of rent, personal use and damage to the property. In the written statement filed by him, the petitioner denied the relationship of landlord and tenant by stating that he was a tenant under Rehmat A.I and Abdul Rashid and after the death of Rehmat A.I he has been paying rent jointly to other landlord Abdul Rashid and Muhammad Siddique son of Rehmat A.I who had allegedly transferred the property to the respondent without any right or authority.
On these pleadings, the learned Rent Controller framed a preliminary issue regarding the existence of relationship of landlord and tenant on which the parties produced their evidence. On 22nd September, 1988, it was found by the Rent Controller that the petitioner was a tenant under respondent No. 1 and while deciding the preliminary issue proceeded to direct the eviction of the petitioner from the premises in question. Aggrieved by this order, an appeal was filed by the petitioner which was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Faisalabad on 14-3-1989. These two orders have been assailed by the petitioner by filing this constitutional petition.
2. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of this petition is that after having decided that the relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the parties, the Rent Controller should have proceeded to hold further inquiry without which the eviction of the petitioner could not have been ordered. Ch. Hamid-ud-din, Darned counsel for respondent No. 1 has, on the other hand contended that in the circumstances of the case there was no need to hold any further inquiry and the Rent Controller was justified in directing the ejectment of the petitioner.
3. There is much force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Under Section 13(1) of the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, a tenant in possession of a building or rented land cannot be evicted there from except in accordance with the provisions of that section. Section 13(2) and (3) enumerates the grounds on which the eviction of the tenant can be ordered. The denial of relationship of landlord and tenant is not one of the grounds so specified in this provision. The question as to whether the tenant by denying the relationship of landlord and tenant forfeits his tenancy stands conclusively determined in negative by the Supreme Court in Muhammad Hussain v. Muhammad Siddique and 2 others (PLD 1988 SC 731) and Makhan Bano v.
Abdul Ghani (PLD 1984 SC 17).