' This First Rent appeal is directed against the order of III-Senior Civil Judge/Rent Controller, Karachi (East), dated 16-3-1991, whereby she allowed an application under section 16(1) of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, and struck off the defence of the appellant for non-compliance with the order of deposit of tentative rent passed under section 16(1) of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, and directed the appellant to vacate the premises and hand over the vacant possession to the respondent within thirty days.
' The respondent had filed an ejectment application being Rent Case No.437/1989, alleging that she is owner of the rented shop, while the appellant is tenant in respect thereof at the rate of Rs.500 p.m. Excluding other charges and taxes. The appellant was alleged to be habitual defaulter and had defaulted in payment of rent from December, 1987 to May, 1989. Hence prayer for ejectment.
The ejectment application was resisted by the appellant on the ground that he was out of country, therefore, could not pay the rent. He took the plea that the Court had no jurisdiction as the shop was situated within the area of Gulberg P.S., and not Jauharabad P.S., over which the Controller had jurisdiction.
2. The learned Controller on an application made by the respondent under section 16(1) of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979 fixed it for filing of objections, on 17-1-1991. The advocate for the appellant pleaded no instructions and, therefore, the learned Controller passed order for deposit of tentative rent on the same day, directing the appellant to deposit (i) arrears from December, 1987 to January. 1989, amounting to Rs.7,000 on or before 31-1-1991, (ii) arrears of rent from February, 1989 to December, 1990, amounting to Rs.11,500 on or before 12-2-1991 and (iii) future monthly rent at the rate of Rs.500 p.m. From January, 1991 onwards on or before 10th of every succeeding calender month. The appellant did not comply with the said order, instead he moved an application on 18-2-1991 requesting for extension of time as he had come to know from his advocate about the said order only on 17-1-1991. The learned Controller dismissed the application for extension of time. It is by now a settled law that the learned Controller has no power at all to extend the time for deposit of rent fixed by him in order under section 16(i) of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979. Besides the reasons given by the learned Rent Controller for refusing to extend the time, are unexceptionable.
3. An application under section 16(2) of the Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, was moved by the respondent. It was reported by the Nazir that only a sum of Rs.1,000 was deposited by the appellant, and that also on 9-3-1991. The application has been allowed on 16-3-1991 as the learned Controller found that the appellant had violated the order for deposit of rent.
4. The plea that the shop is situated within the territorial jurisdiction of Gublerg P.S. And not Jauharabad P.S., over which the learned Controller had no jurisdiction, is of trivial nature as both the police stations are situated within District Central and the learned Controller is the Controller for the entire District. Moreover, no administrative order of the. District Judge (Central) was brought to the notice of this Court by the appellant to show that the learned Controller had no jurisdiction over Gulberg P.S., where the shop is situated. In any case, since the tenancy was admitted this question which related to a minor variation in the territorial jurisdiction distributed by the District Judge could have been decided later on and was not such as would have gone to the root of the case.
Under these circumstances, I do not find any merit in this F.RA., and dismiss the same in limine.
6. In view of the above order, C.M.A. No.623 of 1991 is dismissed as having become infructuous.