JOGINDER SINGH Vs. RAJ TAKKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed by the petitioners-landlord against the order dated 14. 9. 1996 passed by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh. By this order, the learned Rent Controller has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner-landlord under Order 6 Rule 17, C. P. C. for amendment of the petition. In the said application, the landlord had sought amendment of Para 3 (v) of the petition. The existing pare 3 (v) reads as under :

(2.) MR . Chopra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-landlord submitted that the petitioner vide the proposed amendment wants to bring on record the subsequent events and as such, the learned Rent Controller was not correct in rejecting the application filed by the petitioners for amendment of the petition.

(3.) I have given thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. In the proposed amendment, the petitioner wants to bring on record his actual date of retirement from the post of Chairman and Managing Director, National Small Industries Corporation. He also wants to bring on record the particulars about his sons, who also want to settle and live in the suit property and further he wants to bring on record the fact that petitioner No. 2 who himself is the co-owner of the suit premises and is living in USa since 1971 wants to settle in Chandigarh after his retirement. In the existing para 3 (v) it has been stated that the family of the petitioner consists of his wife and two sons who are unmarried. In the existing para it has also been stated that he is retiring after attaining the age of superannuation on 19. 7. 1995 and in the proposed para, it has been stated that he in fact has retired on 13. 9. 1995. As stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner, he did not retire on 19. 7. 1995 as he was granted extension upto 13. 9. 1995.