SUNIL KUMAR Vs. ANURADHA BHARDWAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM No.11422-CII of 2012 The application is allowed and Annexures P-4 to P-8 are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. CR No.2523 of 2012 Sunil Kumar, who is respondent No.1-tenant before the Rent Controller, has filed this revision petition under Section 15(6) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (in short, the Act) to assail order dated 27.03.2012 passed by learned Rent Controller, Ambala thereby dismissing application Annexure P-2 moved by petitioner herein for amendment of written statement. Ejectment petition Annexure P-4 under Section 13 of the Act has been filed by Ram Dass Bhardwaj against petitioner herein and proforma respondent No.7. Ram Dass Bhardwaj alleged himself to be landlord of the demised property and pleaded the petitioner herein to be tenant and proforma respondent No.7 herein (respondent No.2 before the Rent Controller) to be sub-tenant. Ram Dass Bhardwaj has since died and is represented by respondents No.1 to 6 herein as his legal representatives.

(2.) THE petitioner by way of amendment of written statement wants to plead that temple is owner and landlord of the demised property and Ram Dass Bhardwaj was only priest thereof and, therefore, his legal representatives respondents No.1 to 6 have no right as there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. THE petitioner also wants to plead that Ram Dass Bhardwaj got vacated various premises from tenants including Ravish Kumar Jain and Mam Chand and instead of occupying the same, has kept the same vacant and, therefore, plea of personal necessity is malafide. Respondent No.1 to 6 herein by filing reply Annexure p-3 controverted the averments made in the amendment application and opposed the application. It was, however, admitted that possession of only one room has been taken from Mam Chand whereas the portion in occupation of Ravish Kumar Jain is still with him as he was granted time by Hon'ble Supreme Court for vacating the premises till February, Learned Rent Controller vide impugned order dated 27.03.2012 dismissed the petitioner's application for amendment of written statement. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has filed this revision petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that Ram Dass Bhardwaj who filed the ejectment petition was only priest of the temple which is owner and landlord of the demised property and, therefore, legal representatives of Ram Dass Bhardwaj have no right to pursue the eviction petition as there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. This plea cannot be allowed to be taken by the petitioner by amendment of written statement because in his original written statement Annexure P-5, the petitioner herein admitted the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. The ejectment petition was filed by Ram Dass Bhardwaj in his personal capacity alleging himself to be landlord of the demised property. He did not file the ejectment petition as priest of the temple. Even the petitioner herein in his written statement did not even remotely plead that the temple was owner and landlord of the property in question or that Ram Dass Bhardwaj was acting only as priest of the temple. On the contrary, in the written statement, the petitioner categorically admitted himself to be tenant under Ram Dass Bhardwaj. Therefore, the plea now sought to be taken by amendment of written statement in this regard cannot be permitted to be taken. As regards the plea that Ram Dass Bhardwaj had got vacated certain other premises from the tenants, it has not been pleaded in the amendment application as to when the other premises were got vacated by Ram Dass Bhardwaj. Decription of the premises allegedly got vacated by Ram Dass Bhardwaj has also not been given in the amendment application. Names of the tenants from whom the alleged premises were got vacated have also not been mentioned except the names of Ravish Kumar Jain and Mam Chand. Respondents No.1 to 6 herein have admitted that they have got vacated one room from Mam Chand whereas Ravish Kumar Jain has been granted time to vacate the premises in his possession till February 2012. The said plea taken by respondents No.1 to 6 herein may be taken note of by the Rent Controller while deciding the ejectment petition finally. However, proposed amendment of written statement to take vague plea as sought to be taken cannot be permitted.