J B KANSAL Vs. WARYAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision petition by the tenant under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter called 'the Act') challenging the order dated 28th January, 1978 passed by the Additional Controller. By the impugned order the Controller dismissed the application for leave to contest and passed the eviction order under Section 14(1 )(e) of the Act. The respondent, Waryam Singh, filed a petition for eviction of the Petitioner, J. B. Kansal, under Section 14(1 )(e) read with Section 25B of the Act. The summons as prescribed by the Third Schedule of the Act was served upon the tenant on 14th March, 1977. He made an application for leave to contest supported by an affidavit on 21st March, 1977. This affidavit contains the verification in the following form :

(2.) The revision was admitted on 28th March, 1978. The petitioner, J. B. Kansal died on 15th October, 1979. His widow and son made an application C. M. No. 65 of 1980 dated 7th December, 1979 for their substitution. Notice of this application was issued to the respondents for 12th May, 1980 but it appears that no further action was taken on this application. Mr. Hari Shanker, learned counsel for the respondent has no objection if this application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the appli- cation, G.M. No. 65 of 1980 is allowed subject to all just exceptions. The names of the widow and son i.e. Smt. Kaushalya Rani Kansal and Deepak Raj Kansal widow and son of the deceased are ordered to be substituted in the memo of parties. Office may make necessary corrections in the memo of parties accordingly.

(3.) Mr. Bhatia, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that by inadvertance the words "and correct to my belief" in the verification of the affidavit Were written, that no prejudice is going to be caused to the opposite party if these words are either allowed to be deleted or his clients are permitted to file a fresh affidavit in support of the application for leave to defend filed on 21st March, 1977. He says that if these words are deleted the original affidavit dated 21st March, 1977 would be in accordance with Order 19 Rule 3 of the Code. Rule 3 of Order 19 of the Code reads as under : "Rule 3 : Matters to which affidavits shall be confined :