However, applying the general principles of the law of evidence does not mean that a Rent Tribunal must enforce all the provisions of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, as doing so would render Section 34 of the Act redundant and frustrate the legislative objective behind the very enactment of the Act—namely, the expeditious disposal of rent matters. Therefore, a Rent Tribunal cannot be required to adhere strictly to all the principles of the law of evidence codified in the Qanun-e-Shahadat or to any special provisions introduced therein that amend general principles of the law of evidence. A distinction must be drawn between invoking and applying the general principles of the law of evidence codified in the Qanun-e-Shahadat and any special provisions enacted therein. Thus, while adjudicating upon civil rights and obligations in eviction proceedings, a Rent Tribunal should invoke and apply only those general principles of the law of evidence codified in the Qanun-e-Shahadat that are necessary to give effect to the fundamental right of the parties under Article 10A of the Constitution; it need not apply all the principles or any special provisions enacted in the Qanun-e-Shahadat. This distinction is rooted in the summary nature of rent proceedings, which are designed to resolve disputes expeditiously and without the procedural formalities of regular civil trials. The general principles of evidence—such as the burden of proof, relevance of evidence, and the right to cross-examine—must nevertheless apply to safeguard the constitutional right to a fair trial. However, the relaxation of detailed evidentiary rules, such as strict compliance with the formal proof of documents or the exclusion of hearsay evidence, is justified by the need to maintain the efficiency and accessibility of rent proceedings. This approach strikes a balance between upholding due process and preserving the summary character of rent proceedings.
when we examine Articles 17(2)(a) and 79 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, it becomes evident that they do not embody general principles of the law of evidence but rather enact special provisions therein. A Rent Tribunal was, therefore, in no way bound to invoke and apply these provisions for the purpose of determining the genuineness of the tenancy agreement. Accordingly, we answer the question in the terms that a disputed tenancy agreement is not required to be proved in a proceeding before the Rent Tribunal under the Act, in
accordance with the provisions of Articles 17(2)(a) and 79 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat. The reliance of the High Court on three judgments of this Court is misplaced, as they pertain to civil suits, not eviction proceedings.