M. S. QURAISHI, J.-In an ejectment proceeding brought by the petitioner/ landlord, an order had been passed under section 13 (6) of the Urban Rent Restriction Ordinance directing the respondent to deposit arrears of rent from 8-1141965 to 30-4-1969 and future rents. The respondent was found by the Controller to be guilty of non-compliance of that order in respect of rent for the months of July, 1969, February, 1971 and February, 1972 and accordingly his defence was struck out. The Appellate Court, however, found that there was no default as the amounts already deposited by the respondent could be adjusted against the rents for the months in question. The petitioner brought S. A. O. No. 247 of 1974 but same was dismissed by the impugned order dated 12-5-1976.
Aggrieved, he filed this petition for leave to appeal.
2. The question of default is one of fact and we find that both the first appellate Court and the High Court had after carefully examining the account of deposits made by the respondent, come to the conclusion that there had been no default. No case is, therefore, made out for interference. The petition is dismissed.