1. SALEEM AKHTAR, J.---This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in First Rent Appeal No. 10 of 1981 dismissing the appeal in limine filed by the petitioner. The respondent had tiled application for ejectment in which order under section 16(1) of Sind Rented Premises Ordinance, dated 30th September, 1990 was passed and the petition was directed to deposit in Court (1) Rs.28,000 as arrears of rent for three years from September, 1987 within to months (2) Rs.4,000 as arrears of rent from October, 1989 to February, 1990 within to months, (3) Rs.5,600 as arrears of rent from March, 1990, to September, 1990 within a period of one month and (4) further monthly rent at the rate of Rs.800 per month commencing from October, 1990, by ever succeeding calender month. The petitioner complied with the order to the extent that he deposited Rs.5,600 and monthly rent as directed by the Controller. He, however, was unable to deposit arrears of rent of Rs.28,000 and Rs.4,000. On 28-11-1990 the petitioner filed application for extension of the for to months and the learned Controller issued notice for 29-11-1990. On that date the Advocate for the respondent filed objections and opposed the extension. The learned Controller adjourned the hearing to 6-12-1990 for arguments and order as follows:-- "As application for extension of the is to be heard till the hearing of this application I extend the to the opponent in the light of authority i.e. PLD 1963 (West Pakistan) Lahore Page 489."
2. Finally when the matter came up for hearing on 8-1-1991 the respondent had also filed application under section 16(2) of the Sind Rented Premises Ordinance and this application as well as application for extension were heard together. The learned Controller by the impugned order refused to extend the the, struck of the defence and directed the petitioner to hand over the vacant possession of the disputed premises. In appeal the learned Single Judge noted that the petitioner had failed to deposit the rent and the defence was rightly struck of. Mr. Pirzada has not been able to point out to any authority under which the Controller could have extended the the particularly as no valid reason had been made out. Mr. Prizada states that the petitioner did not deposit any rent even up to 6-12-1990. In these circumstances we refuse to grant leave. Petition is dismissed.