RAMAN KUMAR Vs. JAI KANT JINDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition under Art. 227 of Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner-tenant is directed against the order dated 10.10.2013 (Annexure P-1), whereby the application under Order 6, Rule 17 Code of Civil Procedure of the respondent/landlord has been allowed and he has been allowed to make intensive amendments in the ejectment application which is seriously objected to by the counsel for the petitioner. The ground argued is that there is substantial change in the main eviction petition and it was done at a belated stage once the trial had commenced and it would amount to filling up the lacuna as such. Resultantly, the order impugned passed by the Rent Controller, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri is challenged.

(2.) Counsel for the respondent on the other hands submits that it would only help adjudicating on the real controversy and the other side has been duly compensated by payment of Rs. 2,000.00 as costs and the delay if any would be detriment to the respondent/landlord. It is, accordingly, submitted that the amendment would only help the Court to come to the conclusion as such as to what was the real controversy between the parties.

(3.) A perusal of the paper-book would go on to show that the eviction petition was filed on 22.05.2010 (Annexure P-2) of the premises which were described in the petition under Sec. 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and were consisting of Shed, Godown and Office. The measurements were given of all sides specifically but municipal number was not given. Similarly the boundaries were also given regarding the adjoining properties on the north, south, east and west. The properties were stated to be part of Khasra No.786/444, 106, 445 and that part of these Khasras have been merged in Khasra No.34 of Abadi situated with revenue estate of Mamida HB No.416, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.