1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by the tenants' side, against the dismissal by the High Court of Sind, of their first rent appeal from an order of eviction passed on ground of subletting.
2. ' Learned counsel has raised factual controversy with regard to the issue relating to transfer of possession by the petitioner No,1 (original tenant) to petitioner No,2 (the sub-tenant). He has taken us through the relevant material on record and has tried to show that the physical possession had not been transferred; And, that in any case, even if it be held that physical possession had been transferred to the sub-tenant, there was no proof that the "legal" possession had been transferred for consideration like the payment of rent by the sub-tenant to the original tenant.
3. Essentially all these questions are of facts. The learned Judge in the High Court after carefully considering the material brought to his notice, has rendered findings, which are unexceptionable.
4. ' The so-called legal point that there was no direct evidence on question of payment of rent by the sub-tenant or the use and possession of the shop by him in his own right, it also stands resolved by the afore-referred findings. It is needless to add that the Evidence Act could not be made applicable in terms, to the proceedings before the learned Rent Controller. The High Court was thus fully justified in relying on the material on record as also on high probabilities.
5. ' After hearing the learned counsel at some length, we do not consider it a fit case for grant of leave to appeal it stands concluded by findings of fact. Therefore, this petition is dismissed.