LAHORE HIGH COURT RAWALPINDI BENCH

W.P NO. 45/2019

MIAN KHAN (PETITIONER)

VS

HONOURABLE ADJ, CHAKWAL

Writ Petition Article 199

1. Respondent No.7 and 8 executed a sale agreement with Respondent No.9

2. Consideration of Rs. 1 cror 72 lakh for sale of 2 shops i.e. shop No.1 and 14
3. Respondent No.9 delivered the possession of shop No.1 and 14 to the petitioners
4. Petitioner rented out the shops
5. Respondent No.9 did not transfer the shops to Respondent No.7 and 8
6. Hence, Respondent no.7 and 8 filed a suit for specific performance of agreement dated 10-05-
2011 against respondent No.9
7. Dispute went to Supreme Court, however, it directed the Civil Court CHAKWAL for inquiry of
the Iqrarnama which was concluded in favor of Respondent No.7 and 8
8. Senior civil judge initiated proceedings U/S 476 CRPC against Respondent No.9
9. Respondent No.7 and 8 was directed to deposit amount vide order dated 26-03-2013 of Rs. 1
cror and 57lakh
10. Amount deposited as per directed
11. During the whole proceedings petitioners were regularly paying rent to Respondent No.7 and
8
12. Respondent No.3 to 6 on 10-10-2016 concealed relevant facts and filed ejectment petition in
the court of rent controller Chakwal
13. In ejectment petition Respondent No.3 to 6 pleaded that Respondent No.9 was owner of shop
No.1 and rented it out to the petitioners at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month with 10 %
annual increase
14. Son of Respondent No.9 and present petitioner executed a registered exchange deed on 16-
04-2012
15. Thus respondent No. 3 to 6 become owner of disputed shop
16. Son of Respondent No.9 instructed rent to be paid to Petitioner No.1
17. Rent was not paid to Respondent No. 3 and 6, hence, issued a notice on 22-10-2012
18. Petition for leave to contest was filed and was accepted on 18-11-2016
19. Petitioners clarified the position that they are tenants of Respondent No.7 and 8, and paid
rent regularly
20. Petitioners contended that the version of respondent No.3 to 6 has been rejected by then rent
controller , chakwal vide order dated 26-02-2012
21. Petitioners pleaded that they are tenant under respondent No.7 and 8
22. It is explained in the petition for leave to contest that prior to agreement dated 10-05-2011,
tenant used to pay rent to respondent No.9 and after execution of the said agreement the
tenant has been paying the rent to respondent No.7 and 8
AW-1 = Mohabat hussain.
 AW-2 = Ch. Zafar Iqbal
AW-3 = Arif mehmood
Ex-A4 = Registered exchange deed
Ex-A5 = Fard Jambandi
Ex-A6 = Electricity bill
Ex-A7 = P.T.I form
Ex-A8 to Ex-A13 = receipt of payment of tax
Ex-A14 = copy of notice
Ex-A15 and Ex-A16 = postal receipts
Ex-A17 = written reply

 Rent controller dismissed the ejectment petition, order dated 08-03-2018

 Respondent No. 3 to 6 filed appeal in the court of learned District judge, chakwal
 Appeal accepted, on 26-11-2018, directed the petitioner to vacate the suit shop and
hand over its possession to the respondent No. 3 to 6

 Appeal against order dated 08.03.2018 (Page 9-19)

 Ejectment petition (shop No.14) No.06/2016. Date of institution 10.10.2016. date of decision
08.03.2018 (page 34-48)
 Ejectment (shop 14), Punjab Rented Premises Ordinance, 15. Dated 10.10.2016(Page 49-50-51)
 Leave to contest on behalf of Respondents. Dated 05-11-2016(Page 52-54)
 Statement Ex R-1 (Page 57-58)
 Application U/S 5 FOR REGISTRATION OF RENT DEED. EX R7. Dated 09.12.2017 (Page 59-60)
 Reply Ex D. Dated 06.12.2017 (Page 62-63)
 Statement Ex R-2, Dated 06.12.2017 (Page 64)
 Statement Ex R-3, Dated 06.12.2017 (Page 65-66)
 Statement Ex R-4, Dated 06.12.2017 (Page 67)
 Statement Ex R-5, Dated 09.12.2017 (Page 68-69)
 Statement Ex R-6, Dated 09.12.2017 (Page 70-71)
 Reply to application, Dated 01-11-16 (Page 75-76)
 Application for grant of permission to file affidavit on behalf of petitioner No. 1 (Page No.122)
 Application for production of additional evidence (Page No. 123-125)
 Additional evidence (Page No.126-127)
 Application of applicant No.1 (Page No. 130-132)
 Plaintiff witness No. 1 (Page No. 133-135-139-141)
 Applicant witness No. 1 (Page No.137-156)
 Applicant witness No.2 (Page No. 143-145-147)
 Applicant witness No.3 (Page No. 148-150-152)
 Respondent witness No.1 (Page No.154)
 Respondent witness No.2 (Page No. 157-159-161)
 Respondent witness No.3 (Page No. 162-164-166)
 Respondent witness No.4 (Page No. 167-169-171)
 Statement Ex A-2, Dated 16.10.17 (Page No. 175)
 Statement Ex A-3, Dated 16.10.2017 (Page No.176)
 Supreme Court Judgment (Page 205)
 Proceedings U/S 476 CR.P.C Against the responsible for the commission of forgery (Page No.
207-219)

1. Respondent No.3 to 6 filed ejectment petition in respect of shop No. 14. Dated 10-10-2016
(Page No. 49-50)
2. Petitioners filed joint application foe leave to contest the ejectment petition. Dated 05-11-2016
(Page 52-54)
3. Application for leave to contest filed by the petitioners was allowed and issues framed. Dated
18-11-2016 (Page 88)
4. On conclusion of trial, the learned Trial Court was pleased to dismiss the ejectment petition filed
by respondent No. 3 to 6. Dated 08-03-2018 (Page 34-48)
5. Respondent No. 3 to 6 assailed the dismissal of ejectment petition before lower appellate court.
Dated 20-06-2018 (Page 25-23)
6. Appeal of respondents No.3 to 6 was allowed vide judgment impugned herein. Dated 26-11-
2018 (Page 9-18)