1. AZIZULLAH M. MEMON, J.--- This constitutional petition is directed by the petitioner Muhammad Yaqoob (who is tenant/opponent) in Rent Case bearing No,357 of 2004 pending before the 5th Senior Civil Judge/Rent Controller, Karachi, Central against the orders respectively dated 17-12- 2005 and 9-3-2006.
2. Heard Mr. Arshad Mubin, Advocate for the petitioner.
3. Facts giving rise to filing of this constitutional petition are to the effect that respondent Muhammad Aslam and others filed the above Rent Case bearing No,357 of 2004 against the petitioner for his ejectment from the Shop No,3 of the premises known as Waris Manzil situated on Plot No,W.S-14, Block-1, Federal "B" Area, Karachi; petitioner filed his written statement therein whereafter the respondent No,2 filed his affidavit-in-evidence and was cross-examined by the learned counsel for the petitioner/tenant wherein he is said to have stated that he had no knowledge of the contents of his affidavit-in-evidence and signed the same while sitting at his home or his shop, without making appearance before the competent officer of the Court of Rent Controller for such a purpose. He is further said to have stated in the cross-examination that he put his signature on memo. of ejectment application while sitting at his home; therefore, the petitioner filed an application before the Rent Controller with a prayer to "discard/reject affidavit-in-evidence of the applicant and dismiss the rent application along with his affidavit"; vide order dated 17-12-2005 learned Rent Controller dismissed the said application.
4. Again, opponent/petitioner filed application under section 151, Civil Procedure Code in the said rent case with a prayer to direct the said applicant/respondent to file fresh affidavit-in-evidence therein "in order to rectify the mistake, omission committed by him in order to removal of irregularity to the legal proceedings to decide the case on merits, as the said proceedings of his evidence is at very initial stage"; the said application also stands dismissed by the Rent Controller vide order, dated 9-3-2006; hence, the tenant/petitioner has filed constitutional petition against the said two orders. The contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner having been duly considered, suffice it to say that whenever a party states to be unaware of the contents of his affidavit filed in the judicial/quasi judicial proceedings, benefit of such a defect may be awarded to the other party, but the same is to be so awarded at the appropriate stage of such proceedings of the case; it is not necessary for the Rent Controller to throttle further proceedings of the ejectment application at such a stage of the case; applicants/landlords are to be afforded with due opportunity to produce other evidence in support of the ejectment case, strictly in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. No prejudice is caused to the petitioner by means of impugned orders and his rights in the case are yet to be adjudicated upon by the Rent Controller according to law. Hence, this constitutional petition does not carry any force which is hereby dismissed in limine together with the listed applications.