1. ' The present appeal is directed against the order dated 2-4-1990 passed by the learned Second Senior Civil Judge Rent Controller, East Karachi in Rent Case No,167/1989 whereby the application moved by the appellant/opponent under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. Read with section 151, C.P.C. Was dismissed. During the pendency of the present appeal Mst. Mukhtar Aslam appellant died and her L.Rs, have been brought on record.
2. ' Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the present opponent Mr. Muhammad Mahmood had filed an ejectment application under section 15 of Sindh Rent Premises Ordinance 1979 against late Mst. Mukhtar Aslam in respect of ground floor of House NoA-90, Block 3, Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Karachi The Rent Controller recorded evidence of Mr. Muhammad Mahmood and thereafter adjourned the rent application for recording evidence of Mst. Mukhtar Aslam. The record reveals that in spite of ample opportunity given to her by the learned lower Court, appellant Mst.
3. Mukhtar Aslam could not produce her evidence inasmuch as she even did not file affidavit in evidence. Hence her side was closed on 12-12-1989. Consequently by its judgment, dated 9-12-1989, the learned Second Senior Civil Judge Rent Controller, Karachi East ordered the ejectment of the appellant from the demised premises within a period of 30 days. The appellant moved an application as mentioned above for setting aside the above order but the same was dismissed vide impugned order, dated 2-4-1990, hence the present appeal was filed.
4. ' Mr. H.K Rana, learned counsel for the appellant mainly based his arguments on the allegation that the learned counsel appearing for Mst. Mukhtar Aslam in the lower Court had kept her in complete dark in respect of progress of the case. That she did not know about the proceedings in the lower Court and was unaware of the fact that the case was being adjourned from time to time for producing her evidence. He vehemently urged that learned Advocate appearing in the lower court committed gross misconduct in not informing his client about the progress of the case and kept her in dark. He placed reliance on the case of Mashlakhuddin v. Syed Ali Haider 1982 SCM R 57 whereby it is held that the Rent Controller was empowered to set aside ex parte orders and that the Court should keep in view the principles of natural justice. Reliance is also placed on the case of Naveed Hussain v. Mrs. A. Mirza 1982 CLC 1518 wherein same view has been expressed by Sajad Ali Shah, J. Mr. H.K. Rana also invited my attention to the case of Mst. Shirin Begum v. Habib Bhai 1988 SCM R 670 wherein it is laid down that belated application for setting aside ex parte order is of no consequence.
5. I have carefully gone through the record of the lower Court and I find that there is not even a remote indication to support the plea that the learned counsel in the lower Court had intentionally kept applicant Mst. Mukhtar Aslam in dark about the proceedings of the case. Even otherwise it was the A duty of the applicant to be vigilant, and if her Advocate had not informed her about the proceedings of the case she could have easily either herself or through any male member of her family inquired from the lower Court about the progress of the case. Under the circumstances I find that the present appeal has no merits and the same is hereby dismissed with costs.
6. ' The appellant is directed to hand over the vacant possession. Of the premises in dispute to the opponent within 3 months from the date of this order.