1. ' This appeal has been filed challenging the orders passed by the Senior Civil Judge/Rent Controller Shikarpur, whereby he has dismissed the application filed by the present appellant for ejectment of the respondents on the ground that there is no relationship of the landlord and tenant between the parties but at the same time he has ordered that the appellant is entitled to the agreed rent of Rs,35 per month alongwith arrears as prayed in the application.
2. ' Briefly the facts are that the said application for ejectment was filed under sections 15 and 16 of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 on the grounds of default, requirements of personal use and causing of damages to the premises in dispute. The appellant also claimed the rent at the rate of Rs,200 per month. The respondents contested the rent application and filed their written objections. The case of respondents is that they are not the tenants of the present appellant and they have also denied the claim of the appellant on other grounds.
3. ' Dealing with the question of relationship of landlord and tenant the Rent Controller has come to the conclusion that no such relation exists between the parties and therefore the application was liable to be dismissed.
4. In this case the present appellant has filed his own affidavit in evidence alongwith those of two witnesses namely Arbab Ali and Abdul Wahab. It may be observed that the present appellant who claimed the respondents to be his contractual tenants has failed to produce any agreement of tenancy or any rent receipt or other documentary evidence. It is an oral assertion only. Alongwith the rent application he has produced extracts from City Survey Record showing that he had purchased C.S.No,215/1 from one Abdul Aziz on 24-1-1978 which entry was made on 13-3-1978 while the other extracts from City Survey Record pertain to City Survey No,216 which shows that it is a compound joint property of owners of C.S.No,217 to 219. It is not shown if this property C.S.No,216 stands in the name of present appellant. It is also admitted position that no notice under section 13-A of West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, which was then applicable was served upon the present respondents. There is also no other evidence showing that any overt act was done by the parties to give rise to inference that the relationship of landlord and tenant had been created. It may be observed that in an earlier case of Haji Faqir Muhammad v. Hazratullah (1989 CLC 252) it was observed that where the relationship of landlord and tenant was denied and there was no evidence in form of agreement or any other document to show existence of such relationship, the burden would be on the landlord to prove that such relationship existed. In the instant case there is oral assertion by the appellant/landlord which is denied by the other side. It may also be observed that in the above-cited case it was further held that mere fact that the property in dispute is transferred to the applicant and is in occupation of the opponent would not ipso facto be sufficient to give rise to the inference that there was relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. Such relationship can only be created either by some oral or written agreement or by statute. In these circumstances do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the learned Rent Controller to the effect that no relationship of landlord and tenant exists between the parties and as such the application for ejectment filed by the present appellant is rightly dismissed.
5. It may also be observed that as the Rent Controller had held that no relationship of landlord and tenant exists between the parties, his observation to the effect that appellant is entitled to agreed rent of Rs, 35 per month alongwith arrears is uncalled for. With these observations the present appeal is dismissed with costs.
2. In view of the above order this application is infructuous and is dismissed.