On 5 August 2026, a two-member bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled in Nafees Ahmed v. Mrs. Shaheen Begum that a landlord is the best judge of his own personal need and that a tenant cannot dictate which of the landlord's properties should be used to meet that need. The eight-page judgment, authored by Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, set aside a Sindh High Court decision that had blocked the eviction and ordered the tenant to vacate the flat within six months.

The dispute and its journey through the courts

The case concerned a residential flat in a building named Farooq Manzil in Karachi's Saddar area. Co-owner Nafees Ahmed sought eviction of a tenant on grounds of personal need. An eviction order was initially granted at the trial level, but the tenant successfully challenged it before the Sindh High Court, which set the eviction aside: citing the availability of other flats in the same building owned by the landlord. The landlord then approached the Supreme Court.

Sworn affidavit and cross-examination sealed the finding

The Supreme Court found that the landlord had stated his personal need on oath and that the claim withstood cross-examination. The Court held that once a landlord's sworn statement is tested and found genuine, the need is established. The bench observed that the Sindh High Court had overstepped by reappraising the evidence and overturning findings of fact that had already been properly reached.

Other vacant flats do not weaken the landlord's claim

The central tenant argument: that other flats in the same building were available: was expressly rejected. The Court ruled that the existence of other properties does not make a landlord's stated need doubtful. A property owner has the right to decide which of his own properties he wishes to occupy, and a tenant cannot compel him to choose a different flat or shop.

What the ruling establishes

The judgment crystallises several principles for eviction proceedings on grounds of personal need under Pakistan's rent-restriction framework:

  • A landlord's sworn affidavit stating personal need, if found genuine under cross-examination, is legally sufficient to ground an eviction.
  • The landlord: not the tenant and not the court: decides which of his properties best serves that need.
  • The presence of other vacant flats or shops owned by the landlord does not, by itself, raise doubt about the genuineness of the need.
  • A High Court hearing a revision or appeal should not lightly reappraise factual findings already reached by the trial forum.

Immediate effect and practical next step

The Supreme Court set aside the Sindh High Court's ruling and directed the tenant to hand over vacant possession of the flat within six months. The judgment takes immediate effect. Landlords pursuing personal-need evictions should ensure their claim is supported by a sworn affidavit and be prepared for cross-examination; tenants can no longer resist by pointing to other properties in the landlord's portfolio.

The judgment has been reported as eight pages and as authored by Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, sitting with Justice Irfan Saadat Khan. The full text of the judgment has not yet been published on the Supreme Court's website at the time of writing, and the exact date of the hearing and the case citation number have not been independently confirmed outside news reports.