KARNAIL SINGH Vs. PARMINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein is a landlord. He filed a petition seeking eviction of the respondent (tenant) on various grounds as provided under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1949 Act'). The Rent Controller culled out the issues on 24/4/2015, whereas the landlord filed an application for permission to amend the plaint on 8/5/2015. At that stage, the evidence of the parties had not been recorded. In the application, the landlord asserted that the pleadings as already stated are not upto the mark and he has failed to incorporate the necessary ingredients as required under Sec. 13 of the 1949 Act. In substance, the petitioner has prayed for the following amendments:-

(2.) The court dismissed the application vide order dtd. 24/5/2016 on the ground that the application for permission to amend the petition has been filed after a gap of 4 years from the date of filing of the petition and the delay has not been explained. The court also held that the petitioner has failed to exercise due diligence.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length and with their able assistance, perused the paperbook.