N.S. NEELAKANTHAN Vs. NIRANJAN DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition by the tenant against the order of the Additional Rent Controller refusing leave to appear and contest the application for eviction filed by the landlord against the tenant. The landlord filed an application for the eviction of the tenant on the ground of personal requirement. The tenant is in possession of the ground floor comprising of four rooms, two verandahs, one kitchen, one bathroom, one lavatory, one store with front lawn and back court-yard. The landlord is in possession of part of the first floor.

(2.) A notice of the application was served on the tenant in the form prescribed in Schedule III. The tenant within the prescribed period filed an affidavit with a court fee of Rs. 13 affixed on it stating therein the reason for the grant of leave to contest the application. An objection was taken that no application has been filed by the tenant as provided in the IIIrd Schedule and the affidavit cannot be treated as an application and also there is no proper affidavit. The above objections prevailed with the Additional Rent Controller Smt. Manju Goel and she refused the leave and passed an order for eviction.

(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the Additional Rent Controller was not justified in holding that there was no proper application. The tenant was not represented by an advocate when he filed affidavit seeking leave to defend the application. The tenant had filed an affidavit with court fee of Rs. 13 affixed on it on 30th December, 1976. An objection was taken by the other side that there was no application for leave to appear and contest the application supported by an affidavit as provided in the IIIrd Schedule. On 10th May, 1977 the tenant filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 for permission to amend the prayer made in the affidavit filed earlier.