' This appeal is directed against the order of ejectment granted by IX Senior Civil Judge/Rent Controller, Karachi on the ground that the appellant had failed to comply with the tentative rent order, dated 26-7-1980. The appellant had been directed to deposit Rs.4,500 as arrears of rent from 1-9-1979 to 30-6-1980 at Rs.450 per month before 1-10-1980 and he was further directed to deposit further rent from July, 1980 by 10th August, 1980 and so on. The Nazir's report showed that no deposit was made by the appellant in August, 1980 and, therefore, the rent of July, 1980 was not deposited in time. Similarly no deposit was made by 10-9-1980 and, therefore, there was clear default in the payment of rent for August, 1980 as well. Even in respect of the arrears, the appellant deposited only a sum of Rs.900 on 15-9-1980 out of 4,500 which was ordered to be paid before 1- 10-1980, therefore, the appellant failed to deposit a sum of Rs.3,600 out of the arrears within the time directed by the Rent Controller. The appellant however deposited Rs.450 on 11-10-1980 and Rs.2,000 on 4-10-1980. These two amounts were clearly deposited beyond the stipulated time of 1- 10-1980 and hence the appellant had failed to abide by the order of the Rent Controller, dated 26- 7-1980. The appellant had contended before the Rent Controller in reply to the application under section 16(2) that the order of 26-7-1980 had been passed ex parte against him but I have seen that order and the first line of the order shows that the opponent's counsel was present, therefore, obviously the appellant's contention that it was an order passed without hearing him is wrong, if the opponent's counsel wanted to make any submissions the Rent Controller would have heard him. Further contention of the appellant was that there was an agreement between him and the respondent for depositing the rent in the manner that the appellant deposited. This is a misconceived situation because once the order had been made by the Rent Controller on 26-7- 1980 the parties could not have come to a different compromise without seeking the orders of the Rent Controller in that respect.
2. Mr. Ghous Muhammad Khan, Advocate for the respondent has informed me that the appellant has not deposited any amount after 1-10-1983 and according to the learned counsel the arrears now due from the appellant amount to Rs.9,500 upto January, 1985. In this view of the matter granting further time for ejectment of the appellant would be rather a misuse of concession. In this view of the matter the appeal is without any substance and is hereby dismissed. The appellant and his counsel had been called absent.