On an application made by respondent No. 1, Shahab-ud-Din, herein--after referred to as the respondents, for ejectment of the petitioner, Khurshid Ahmad Qais, from certain premises, a Rent Controller directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 13,100 as arrears of rent, before 13th November, 1980.
The petitioner, however, did not comply with the order of the learned Rent Controller with the result that his defence was struck off and his ejectment was ordered. The petitioner went in appeal before an Additional District Judge who, on 26th November, 1980, suspended the order of the learned Rent Controller and directed the petitioner to deposit arrears of rent before 17th December, 1980. Even then the petitioner did not deposit the arrears of rent. Consequently, the learned Additional District Judge summarily dismissed his appeal. The petitioner has, therefore, filed this writ petition to question the validity of the order of the learned Additional District Judge.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that due to the petitioner's failure to deposit arrears of rent in compliance with the order made by him, the learned Additional District Judge could simply recall the stay order granted in his favour but could not dismiss the appeal as done by him.
In reply, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that in view of the provisions of subsection
(5) of section 15 of the Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance, 1959, the learned Additional District Judge could order summary dismissal of the appeal and, therefore, the order made by him was not open to any legitimate exception.
3. The provisions of subsection (5) of section 15 of the said Ordinance read as follows :- "(5) The Appellate Authority admitting an appeal for hearing shall have the same powers to direct the tenant to deposit the rent as are vested in the Controller under this Ordinance and; if the tenant makes default in compliance with such an order, then, if he is the appellant, his appeal shall be dismissed summarily and, if he is the respondent, his defence shall be struck off."
It is not denied that the petitioner had not deposited arrears of rent as ordered by the learned Additional District Judge. Therefore, according to the aforesaid provisions of law, the learned Additional District Judge could summarily dismiss the appeal of the petitioner due to his failure to deposit A arrears of rent in terms of the order of the learned Appellate Authority. In this view of the matter, his order does not call for any interference by this Court.
4. Resultantly, this writ petition fails. It is dismissed in limine.