' QAZI MUHAMMAD FAROOQ, J.--- A suit for specific performance of a contract embodied in an agreement to sell was decreed by the learned trial Court on 20-1-1994 with the condition that the plaintiff shall deposit an amount of Rs,96,000 within one month of the passing of the decree otherwise the suit would stand dismissed. The petitioner preferred an appeal and the learned Additional District Judge, Multan on 22-11-1994 directed the petitioner to deposit the decretal amount before 15-12-1994 with the learned trial Court and to produce the receipt. The petitioner did not deposit the decretal amount during the extended period and also did not enter appearance when the appeal came up for hearing on 9-1-1995 with the result that the same was dismissed for non-prosecution. Sometime thereafter he submitted an application for restoration of the appeal but that too was dismissed for non-prosecution on 10-3-1996. He submitted another application for restoration of the application for restoration of the appeal but after a hot contest it was dismissed on 12-3-1998. The said order was challenged by him through a revision petition but the same was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan on 2-1-1999.
Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner we have come to the irresistible conclusion that the impugned judgment does not warrant interference because the petitioner had not only shown disregard to the initial as well as the extended time frame fixed for depositing the decretal amount but also filed the application for restoration of the application dismissed for non- prosecution beyond the prescribed period of limitation. The explanation that he had gone to Karachi where he had remained under treatment for six months having met with an accident lacks plausibility for want of proof. The petitioner remained indolent throughout in spite of the indulgence shown by the learned Appellate Court in extending time. No further indulgence can be shown as by passage of time the suit stands dismissed and valuable rights have accrued to the respondents.
Consequently, this petition is dismissed and leave refused.