MANJIT SINGH NAYYAR Vs. GURDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A petition for eviction of the tenant from the tenanted premises located in Phase -IX, SAS Nagar, Mohali, was filed by the landlord, respondent herein. Soon thereafter, it was discovered by the landlord that title of the eviction petition had wrongly been mentioned. Instead of mentioning that it was a petition for eviction of the tenant under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, it had wrongly been mentioned to be a petition under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973. Similar mistake was made in the paragraph of the petition regarding cause of action. Before the issues were framed, an application under Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C. was made by the respondent -landlord for seeking amendment of the petition to rectify the clerical mistake without bringing any change in the nature of the petition. Allowing the said application for amendment vide impugned order of 24.7.2014, amended petition was taken on record. This order is under challenge from the side of the tenant claiming that there is basic change in the petition and entire ambit and scope of the petition has got changed.

(2.) THIS plea of the tenant is mis -founded. Relevant observations of the Rent Controller in the impugned order are to the following effect: