' GHULAM RABBANI, J.---Mrs. Kausar H. Hamid respondent No, 1, herein filed a Rent Case in which, the Rent Collector, Karachi East, passed an order on application under section 16(1) of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 requiring the petitioner, herein to deposit arrears of the rent within 30 days and to continue depositing future rent at the rate of Rs,60,094 per month on or before 10th of every calendar month. No compliance of this order was made, therefore, the defence of the petitioner was struck off and she was required to hand over vacant possession of the premises in question to respondent No, 1 within 30 days. Her appeal was dismissed; however, the Appellate Court granted 1 year's time to the petitioner for vacating the premises in question.
2. Feeling aggrieved, both the parties challenged the above decision by way of 2 separate Constitutional Petitions. The petition of the petitioner was dismissed by a short order dated 19-5- 2010 followed by reasons dated 25-5-2010, requiring her to hand over within 30 days the vacant possession to the respondent No,1 whose petition was also disposed of accordingly, vide judgment impugned herein.
3. We have heard learned counsel for petitioner in presence of one Hamayun Latif Hamid, husband and attorney of respondent No,
1. During the course of arguments, learned counsel admitted the default in making payment of the rent as held by the learned Rent Controller; so also, he admitted that the rent was not paid to the respondent No,1.At the appeal stage. Learned counsel, however, urged that the order of the Appellate Court granting 1 year's time to vacate the premises be revived. When asked as to under what provision of law the period of time asked for could be revived; particularly, where the petitioner had, blatantly, violated the order of the Rent Controller to pay the rent; she had failed to show scruples to pay the determined rent subsequently, and where the Appellate Court had, without hearing the land lady granted such a long period of time with obvious restraint and deviance from normal course to put a condition requiring the petitioner to keep making payment of monthly rent during the extended period mulch to the detriment of the land lady to suffer financially, learned counsel is not in a position to furnish any satisfactory reply.
4. On perusal of impugned judgment we have noted that the learned Appellate Court having heard the arguments of both the parties on 11-2-2010 fixed 15-2-2010 for announcement of judgment, which was deferred to 17-2-2010 when on an application of petitioner for grant of 1 year's time for vacating the tenement the date of announcement of judgment was shifted to next date viz. 18-2- 2010 when the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed and 1 year's time was granted without any notice to the other side and without providing, opportunity of hearing to the land lady. It appears that the landlady/respondent No, 1 had, subsequently, made a complaint to the honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan and the honourable Chief Justice of High Court of Sindh making allegation of preparation of the false case diary for 17-2-2010 by learned Judge of the Appellate Court. The said complaint was sent to the District and Sessions Judge, East for enquiry, who concluded the same with following observation:-- "From the bare reading of the judgment and keeping on record for grant of one year's time for vacating the premises to the appellant/tenant without notice and or hearing the other side on the application anyone can opine that the Ld. Judge has failed to dispose of the appeal with judicial mind and would not feel any hesitation to say that the integrity of the Ld. Judge is questionable in such circumstances."
5. Having discussed the matter as above and on examining the material made available on record, we do not find any legal or factual defect in the impugned judgment to warrant interference.
Therefore, we dismiss this petition. However, before parting, we feel constrained to observe in the given circumstances, where a clear finding has been given that, "the appellate Judge failed to dispose of the case with judicial mind" and a very serious remark has also appeared against him in the term that the integrity of the learned Judge is questionable in such circumstances", it requires an appropriate action against him. We, therefore, direct the office to send a copy of this judgment to Hon'ble Chief justice of High Court of Sindh to consider initiating an appropriate disciplinary proceedings against the concerned judge, if not already taken, in accordance with law.