RAM BHAROSEY Vs. MANJU AGRAWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 5th November, 2004, passed by the appellate authority under the provisions of the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972, (in short 'the Act') before whom the appeal under Section 22 of 'the Act' is pending, whereby the amendment application filed on behalf of the petitioner-tenant has been rejected by the appellate authority.

(2.) The brief facts of the present case are that the respondent-landlady Manju Agrawal filed an application under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act for the release of the accommodation in question against the petitioner-tenant as she bona fide requires the aforesaid accommodation in question. The prescribed authority vide its order dated 13th August, 2004, allowed the release application filed by the landlady and released the aforesaid accommodation in favour of the landlady-respondent.

(3.) Aggrieved by the order of the prescribed authority, the petitioner-tenant preferred an appeal before the appellate authority, which is pending, as stated above. During the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner-tenant filed an application, paper No. 17 Ka seeking amendment in the written statement. This application is opposed by the respondent-landlady on the ground, firstly that the aforesaid application has been filed just to delay the disposal of the appeal and secondly, at the appellate stage the petitioner-tenant wants to carve out a new case, which is not taken up before the prescribed authority and thirdly it has not been stated as to why the amendment which is now sought, could not be incorporated at the time when the written statement was filed, as these facts were very well in existence when the application was opposed by the tenant. The appellate authority considered the aforesaid application and the objection filed by the respondent-landlady and recorded a finding that all the amendments, which are sought to be brought on record by means of amendment application were either in the knowledge of the tenant when the written statement was filed, or are already on records in form of affidavit as the evidence and thus the appellate authority found that the application has been filed only to delay of the disposal of the appeal, therefore the amendment prayed, cannot be granted by means of the amendment in written statement. The application therefore was rejected by the appellate authority. Thus, this writ petition.