RAM NARAIN Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE UNNAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ravi Nath Tilhari, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.Q. Siddiqui, learned Counsel for the respondent/landlord. Controversy involved in the present case relates to a shop in house having municipal number 225 situated at Mohalla Hakim Tola, City, Pargana, Tehsil and District Unnao in respect of which respondents/landlord on 12.9.1997 moved an application under section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972) for release. Accordingly P.A. Case No. 12 of 1997 registered before Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (Senior Division) Unnao in which tenant/petitioner filed written statement on 7.8.2009 (Annexure No. 3). After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on the basis of material on record, the Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (Senior Division) Unnao allowed P.A. Case No. 12 of 1997 vide order dated 1.5.2010(Annexure No. 4).

(2.) Aggrieved by the same, tenant filed an appeal under section 22 of U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 registered as Rent Appeal No. 4 of 2010 Ram Narain v. Anwar Kamal and others. In the said appeal, tenant/petitioner moved an application under Order VI, Rule 17 CPC for amendment in written statement alleging therein that at the time of preparation of appeal it is found necessary to explain and elaborate the facts as mentioned in written statement already filed by him by adding 12-A, 13-A, 27 and 28 registered as Application No. 29-A to which landlords field their objection registered as 34-C. The Appellate Authority vide order dated 30.10.2010 (Annexure No. 1) rejected the petitioner's application for amendment hence the present writ petition has been filed.

(3.) Sri R.N. Tilhari, learned Counsel for the petitioner while assailing the impugned order dated 30.10.2010 submits that order passed by Court below thereby rejecting the petitioner's application for amendment in written statement is wholly illegal and arbitrary in nature because by way of amendment tenant/petitioner wants to add those facts which are already on record and amendment which sought only to add some facts necessary to explain and elaborate the facts in order to bring legal plea on record as such it ought to be allowed keeping in mind that amendment in written statement should be liberally considered.