1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--A tenant has sought leave to appeal; against the disposal by the High Court, of his writ petition against the order of eviction on the basis of compromise.
2. ' The impugned order passed by the High Court reads as follows:--"Parties in person alongwith their learned counsel.
3. ' After detailed negotiation, the parties have arrived at a compromise, whereunder, respondent No,1 has allowed the petitioner to continue to occupy the suit premises upto 31st October, 1989 (on regular payment of the monthly rent presently in currency), on which date the latter has convenanted and undertaken to hand over vacant possession whereof unto the former; failing which the impugned judgment shall become operative forthwith.
4. ' This petition is disposed of in terms of the compromise set out above."
5. Learned counsel tried to argue the merits of the case. However, when questioned as to what is the reason for the petitioner's non-compliance with the compromise arrived at before the High Court after a "detailed negotiations", learned counsel stated that the petitioner was not properly advised and that he would suffer irreparable loss if the impugned order is implemented.
6. ' The petitioner was represented and assisted in the High Court by a learned Advocate. The compromise was reached after detailed negotiations. There is no justification for the petitioner for backing out of a solemn agreement in which he gained the advantage of further retaining the possession of the suit premises for about nine months. That being so, leave to appeal is refused.