JAI RAM Vs. SHANTI NARAIN ANAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN ejectment application was filed by the petitioner for the ejectment of the respondent from the shop in dispute on certain grounds. During the pendency of the petition, an application was filed for amendment of the plaint so as to take up a plea that during the pendency of the ejectment application, respondent has sublet a shop to one Subhash Chand. The said application was declined vide impugned order by the learned Rent Controller. The learned Rent Controller found that application has not been made bonafide and amendment is not necessary for complete and proper adjudication of the case.

(2.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel, I find that this revision petition must succeed. It is the case of the landlord that during the pendency of the ejectment application, respondent has sublet the premises to one Subhash Chand and if this is so, then the learned Rent Controller ought to have allowed amendment of the application filed by the landlord. No prejudice is going to be caused to the tenant in case the petitioner is allowed to amend his ejectment application.