CHETAN PRAKASH Vs. THE CIVIL JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India petitioner challenges the validity of the order dated 27.7.2000 whereby application filed by the petitioner for amendment in the written statement filed in the case under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972), for short the Act, was dismissed. It has been urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that for the purposes of present case, it was necessary to amend the written statement as in the similar facts and circumstances, it has been stated that the suits and release applications were filed by the landlady, respondent No. 2 and were ultimately not pressed or withdrawn after the rent was enhanced. In the written statement, the petitioner has already pleaded that the need of respondent No. 2, the landlady was not genuine. In support of that, petitioner could file affidavit stating all these facts which were sought to be brought on record by means of amendment. The amendment of written statement was, therefore, not necessary for resolving the controversy involved in the case. The petitioner can still file supplementary affidavit in support of his case. If such an affidavit is filed same shall be taken on record and shall be considered at the time of hearing of the case.

(2.) WITH these observations and directions, this petition stands finally disposed of.