KHUSHI RAM Vs. SURINDER PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED against the action of the Rent Controller, Ludhiana to permit amendment of the petition filed under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act for ejectment of the petitioner from a shop, he has filed the present revision petition. The facts, in brief, are that Smt. Vaneeta Rani wife of Sadhu Singh filed the above-noted petition for ejectment of the petitioner on the ground of non-payment of rent w.e.f. 1.8.1990 and on the ground that the shop in dispute was required for use and occupation by her husband. The petitioner filed reply to this petition and later on filed an amended reply also. During the pendency of this petition, Sadhu Singh husband of the petitioner, died on 8.1.2005. Smt. Vaneeta Rani accordingly filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC for amendment of the petition on the ground that during the life time of her husband, the shop was required for use and occupation of the husband, whereas due to his unfortunate death, his son would be needing the same, who has now attained the age of twenty and wants to start his independent business on completion of his study. As per averment in the application, the son of Vaneeta Rani wanted to start a Karyana business in the shop for which he had sufficient experience. The petitioner filed reply to this application. Unfortunately Smt. Vaneeta Rani also died on 27.8.2007 and now the ejectment petition is being prosecuted by respondent Nos. 1 to 4, who have been brought on record as her legal representatives. The learned Rent Controller, Ludhiana has allowed this application. It is observed that the ground that the death of Sadhu Singh, husband of Vaneeta Rani, would not change the basic character of the present rent petition as earlier the husband wanted this property for his personal necessity, which is now needed for his son for the same purpose. This order is impugned in the present revision petition.

(2.) MR . Gurcharan Dass, the learned counsel for the petitioner by relying on some observations made in the case of Prem Chand v. Chetan Dass, 2006(1) RCR(Civil) 164 : 2006(2) Civil Court Cases 41 has urged that parties should not be allowed to substitute one cause of action or the nature of claim for another as claimed originally or should also not be allowed to change the subject matter or the controversy in the suit. This court in case of Prem Chand (supra) while going into principle which stands established on account of various judicial decisions regarding amendment, observed as under :-

(3.) THE real controversy in this case relates to the fact whether the shop was needed for personal purpose by the husband of Vaneeta Rani or not. It is indeed noticeable that Vaneeta Rani being a lady was seeking ejectment of the petitioner from the shop for use by her husband, who unfortunately died. The need for use of a shop by son of Vaneeta Rani, thus, would continue. This would also not be a substitution by a cause. It would also not change the nature of a claim as was originally made. It also did not change the subject matter or the controversy in the suit. On death of Vaneeta Rani, the son, who needed this shop stands substituted as one of the legal heir and thus it has now become a case of personal use by one of the respondents, who earlier was coming in picture as a son of Vaneeta Rani requiring the shop for his personal use. There is no inconsistency in the plea raised in the amendment application. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel could not dispute this fact that respondents were entitled to file a suit for ejectment on the ground on which the amendment has been allowed. In Panna Lal v. Smt. Kamla Devi, 1990(1) RCR(Rent) 418 : 1990(1) RLR 84, it is observed that all the legal representatives, in general law, are entitled to fight on the same cause of action having the same right vested in a person, who has come to the court of law. In this view of the matter, no interference in the impugned order is called for and the same is accordingly dismissed. Revision dismissed.