NEHA ARORA Vs. NEERU MAJAHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed praying for setting aside the order dated 24.9.2019 passed by the Rent Controller, Amritsar, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of the petition filed under Section 13 of the East Punjab Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short 'the Act') has been dismissed.

(2.) The facts in brief are that the petitioner herein, along with her sister respondent No.2, filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act seeking ejectment of respondent No.l from the demised premises on the grounds of arrears of rent and bonafide need for her own use and occupation. The said petition was contested by respondent No.l, while admitting herself to be a tenant as well as rate of rent.

(3.) During the pendency of the petition, respondent No.l filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') on 8.9.2015 seeking amendment of the written statement to the effect that her husband Chander Shekhar has died and has left behind respondent No.l as well as one son and a daughter and as such they also have become tenants in the property in question. The said amendment was allowed on 3.5.2017. In view of the amendment allowed in the written statement, the petitioner also filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code for amendment of the petition, seeking to implead the legal heirs of Chander Shekhar and also to make an averment that after the death of Chander Shekhar the tenancy was continued by the legal heirs of late Chander Shekhar. She also wanted to add that respondent No.l has a number of properties in her possession being owner and therefore, the need of the petitioner and her sister is bonafide and the respondent No.l has not disclosed the property in her possession with the sole motive to harass and humiliate the petitioner. The Rent Controller dismissed the application while passing the impugned order on the ground that once the trial has commenced the application for amendment cannot be allowed. Aggrieved against the impugned order, the petitioner has filed the instant revision petition.