' RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.--- Petitioner-company seeks leave to appeal against Sindh High Court order, dated 28-4-2003 dismissing his Constitutional Petition No,S-558 of 2002 calling into question the judgment passed by respondent No,3 i,e, learned District Judge, Karachi-Central dismissing the ejectment application brought by the petitioner against respondent No, 1.
2. Sole ground which weighed with the appellate authority under the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 against the order of ejectment appears to be that the person who signed the ejectment application was not authorized by the Company through a resolution of the Board of Directors nor was any power of attorney executed in his favor for institution of eviction proceedings against the respondent. Learned appellate authority found that name of the petitioner-company had been struck off the Register of Companies by the Registrar Joint Stock Companies way back in 1979. In the absence of existence of a company lawfully registered, learned District Judge upon the principle of law laid down in Habib Bank Ltd. v. Zelins Limited 2000 SCM R 472, non-suited the petitioner and dismissed the ejectment application. Petitioner's constitutional petition against the said order met the same fate in the High Court, hence this petition.
3. We have heard Mr. Muhammad Younus, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner and Mr. Nadeem Azhar Siddiqui, learned Advocate Supreme Court who has entered appearance on behalf of respondent No, 1 .
4. Mr. Muhammad Younus learned Advocate Supreme Court was obliged to concede that the name of the company was struck off the Register of Companies by the competent authority vide order, dated 11-10-1979 but he vehemently contended that proceedings for restoration of the company were sub judice before the Sindh High Court in Judicial Miscellaneous No,12 of 1997 culminating in a favorable order vide judgment, dated 30-9-1998.
5. Be that as it may, since legal position is well-settled and the person who instituted ejectment proceedings on behalf of company was not duly authorized, following the principle of law laid down in Khan Iftikhar Hussain Khan of Mamdot v. Ghulam Nabi Corporation Ltd. PLD 1971 SC 550 and Habib Bank Ltd. (supra), we find no legal defect or error of jurisdiction in the view taken by the High Court, which is not open to any exception.
6. For the aforesaid facts and reasons, no ground for grant of leave B is made out with the result that this petition fails and is hereby dismissed.