CURRENT INDIAN STATUTES Vs. VRINDAVAN PACKERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed a petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Rent Restriction Act for eviction of the respondents from the premises in question. An application was moved by the petitioner for permission to amend the petition. Vide the impugned order dated 29.9.2010, the said application was dismissed by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh. Hence, the present petition.

(2.) Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Rent Controller had erred in dismissing the application for amendment of the petition filed by the petitioner. The petitioner merely sought to correct the name and description of the petitioner and plead certain facts which had transpired during the pendency of the petition. In support of his arguments, learned senior counsel has placed reliance on Purushottam Umedbhai and Co. v. M/s Manilal and Sons, 1961 AIR(SC) 325, wherein, in para 8, it was held as under :-

(3.) Learned senior counsel has further placed reliance on M/s Chhotelal Pyarelal, the partnership firm and others v. Shikharchand, 1984 AIR(SC) 1570, wherein in para 2, it was held as under :-