KRISHAN LAL Vs. RAM RATTAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) No body is present on behalf of the respondents in spite of serviced. Ex parte proceedings are taken against them.

(2.) The petitioner filed this petition for ejectment of the respondents from the two rooms which were being used as shops by them on the ground of non-payment on rent and subletting. During the pendency of this petition a Full Bench of this Court took the view that even if any portion of a residential building is let out for commercial purpose, the nature of the demised premised would not be changed unless it was so permitted by the Rent Controller. So the petitioner moved an application for permission to take additional ground of personal necessity for the ejectment of the respondents. The Rent Controller rejected that application holding that it would change the cause of action and totally a new one would be substituted. Obviously, the view of the Rent Controller cannot be sustained. The petitioner only wanted to add additional ground of ejectment. So far as the building is concerned he has already stated that the two rooms from part of the residential building which were being used by the respondents as shops. So no new cause of action was sought to be pleaded and the Rent Controller illegally refused to allow the amendment on wholly unsustainable ground. This petition is consequently allowed and the order of the Rent Controller reversed subject to the payment of Rs. 200/- as costs.