RAM NARAIN SHARMA Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is tenant's writ petition, arising out of evic­tion/release proceedings initiated by the landlord -respondent No. 3 under sec­tion 21 of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 against tenant-petitioner seeking his eviction from the tenanted accommo­dation on the ground of bona fide need of the landlord. Tenanted accommoda­tion is a shop. Tenant filed written statement questioning the alleged partition between landlord-applicant and his brothers. Release application was regis­tered as Case No. 11 of 1991 on the file of Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (S.D.), Lalitpur, Khoob Chand v. Ram Narain Sharma. Tenant-petitioner filed an application seeking amendment in his written statement. It was stated in the amendment application that another house which was in possession of another tenant had been vacated and other family members of the landlord had started some business from the said house. It was alleged that landlord had let out the said house to his relative i.e., nephew, son of Khoob Chand.

(2.) LANDLORD filed his reply and stated that amendment sought was frivolous and earlier also four amendment applications had been given. Prescribed authority rejected the amendment application through order dated 20.3.1997 holding that the facts soughts be added were already there in para 31 of the written statement and the main purpose of the tenant was to delay the proceedings. Against the said order, Revision No. 90 of 1997 was filed which was dismissed by District Judge, Lalitpur on 13.11.1997, hence this writ peti­tion.

(3.) I do not find least error in the impugned orders, repeated amendment applications filed by the tenant clearly proved that he was interested only in delaying the matter. Prescribed authority rightly held that the pleas sought to be added through amendment had already been taken in the written state­ment.