1. Through this appeal appellant Muhammad Afzal has challenged the order dated 6-8-1986 of learned 1st Rent Controller, Sukkur in Rent Application No.84 of 1993 whereby he was directed to hand over the vacant possession of the case premises as his defence was struck off under section 16(2) of Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979, hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance.
2. Briefly the facts relevant for the purpose of this appeal are that respondent Dr. Abdul Aziz filed .An application under section 15 of Ordinance stating therein that he is owner/landlord of Building C.S. 2624/4, situated at Shaheed Ganj, Sukkur and appellant Muhammad Afzal was rented a shop bearing C.S. No.2624/4 at ground-floor as a tenant since 1991. Tenancy was renewed from 1993 by an agreement dated 29-6-1993 whereby appellant agreed to pay a monthly rent at Rs.3,500 to respondents within 10 days after the expiry of every month. His further case is that appellant/tenant remained most irregular in payment of monthly rent and sufficient amount became outstanding as arrears of monthly rent from April, 1993 as he usually pay Rs.1,500 per month, as such a sum of Rs.15,500 became outstanding in May, 1993 and such balance as arrears of monthly rent was signed by appellant. As regard default, it is alleged that since June, 1993 appellant failed to pay the monthly rent of the premises to the respondent, and, therefore, has wilfully defaulted in making the payment of monthly rent. As such he was served with a notice on 24-10-1993 to vacate the shop and hand over the possession to the respondent and also pay monthly rent from June, 1993 at the rate of Rs.3,500 per month alongwith arrears of Rs.15,500 within fortnight but appellant paid Rs.1,500 only on 25-5-1993 and did not pay the arrears and became defaulter. Thereafter on 19-12-1993 respondent moved an application under section 16(1) of the Ordinance in the main rent case, seeking order against appellant directing him to deposit the arrears of monthly rent of the shop from July 1993 and future monthly rent at the rate Rs.3,500 per month. Learned Rent Controller allowed the above application on 15-2-1995 and ordered the appellant to deposit the rent at the rate of Rs.2,000 per monthly tentatively on or before 10th of each calendar month and further directed him to deposit the arrears of monthly rent at the rate of Rs.2,000 from July, 1993 within one month of the order.
3. The appellant as well as respondent challenged this order in Petition No-303 of 1990 before this Court and it was on 14-2-1996 the D.B. Of this Court dismissed the petition filed by the appellant maintaining the order of learned Rent Controller and further directed the appellant to deposit monthly rent at the rate Rs.2,000 per month and to further deposit the arrears as directed by the learned Rent Controller within 2 weeks from the order.
4. The appellant as well as his counsel admit that appellant did not comply with this order and has failed to deposit the arrears as well as future monthly rent. On 20-4-1996 respondent moved an application under section 16(2) of the Ordinance which was allowed on 6-8-1996 and the defence of the appellant was struck off.
5. All these show that the appellant has wilfully and deliberately defaulted in making payment of the arrears as ordered by DB of this Court and so also directed by the learned Rent Controller and has also failed to deposit the future monthly rent. The learned counsel is unable to point out any illegality in the order, the order dated 6-8-1996 of learned Rent Controller is maintained and the appellant is directed to vacate the shop and hand over its vacant possession to respondent within one month.
6. The First Rent Appeal No.6 of 1996 is dismissed in limine.