ANURAG SETIA Vs. PAWAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein seeks to challenge the order dtd. 16/11/2018 passed by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking amendment of the written statement has been dismissed.

(2.) In brief, facts are that the respondent/landlord filed a petition under Sec. 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act for eviction of the petitioner from the 1st floor of Shop No. 1543/22, situated in Rana Haveli Market, Mani Majra, U.T., Chandigarh, on the ground of non- payment of rent and personal necessity. A written statement was filed by the petitioner herein through his counsel Shri Anil Mehta and thereafter issues were framed by the Rent Controller. The respondent/landlord tendered his evidence and documents and after several opportunities was cross- examined. The evidence of the respondent commenced and thereafter an application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Sec. 151 of the Code for amendment of the written statement came to be filed. Reply thereto was filed by the respondent/landlord and after consideration the impugned order was passed dismissing the application. Aggrieved against that order, the instant revision has been filed.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/tenant contends that it came to the notice of the petitioner that the written statement filed by his counsel in fact did not take into account certain facts which were sought to be incorporated in the preliminary objections. In the application, it was also mentioned that necessary facts are missing in the petition, while stating the counsel for the petitioner had filed the written statement on his behalf in another eviction petition filed against him, namely Gulshan Kumar Vs. Anurag Setia and the same reply has been filed in the instant petition with minor changes.