Ibrar Hussain v. Abdul Karim,
CLC 2012 809 · Balochistan High Court
This case is about a landlord-tenant dispute over property in Quetta. Ibrar Hussain claimed he had bought the ground floor property from Abdul Karim, and that Abdul Karim and his wife, Mst. Qamar Begum, were his tenants living on the first floor. He filed for their eviction. The wife denied being anyone's tenant, insisting the property was actually purchased and built with her own money, though registered through her husband, who later sold it to the appellant without her consent. The husband never showed up in court to defend the sale or contest the case.
The Rent Controller dismissed the eviction application, and the High Court upheld that decision. The court explained that simply proving ownership was not enough - the appellant also had to prove an actual landlord-tenant relationship existed, meaning someone must be legally obligated to pay him rent. Mere physical occupation of a property does not make someone a tenant, since people can also occupy premises as owners, licensees, or trespassers. Since the wife claimed to possess the property in her own right as owner, not through her husband, she did not automatically become the new owner's tenant just because her husband sold the property. The court also noted the appellant should first get his ownership title legally confirmed by a court before seeking eviction, especially since the wife had separately filed a suit challenging the sale itself. This case highlights that ownership and tenancy are legally distinct, and eviction requires proof of both.
یہ مقدمہ کوئٹہ میں واقع ایک جائیداد سے متعلق مالک مکان اور کرایہ دار کے درمیان تنازع کا ہے۔ ابرار حسین نے دعویٰ کیا کہ اس نے عبدالکریم سے نچلی منزل کی جائیداد خریدی تھی، اور یہ کہ عبدالکریم اور اس کی بیوی مسماۃ قمر بیگم اوپر کی منزل پر بطور کرایہ دار رہائش پذیر تھے۔ اس نے دونوں کے خلاف بےدخلی کی درخواست دائر کی۔ بیوی نے کسی کی بھی کرایہ دار ہونے سے انکار کیا اور اصرار کیا کہ جائیداد دراصل اس کے اپنے پیسوں سے خریدی اور تعمیر کی گئی تھی، اگرچہ یہ رجسٹری اس کے شوہر کے نام پر تھی، جس نے بعد میں اس کی رضامندی کے بغیر یہ جائیداد اپیل کنندہ کو فروخت کر دی۔ شوہر خود کبھی عدالت میں پیش ہی نہیں ہوا تاکہ اس فروخت کا دفاع کرے یا مقدمے کی مخالفت کرے۔
رینٹ کنٹرولر نے بےدخلی کی درخواست خارج کر دی، اور ہائی کورٹ نے اس فیصلے کو برقرار رکھا۔ عدالت نے وضاحت کی کہ محض ملکی