CHANAN LAL Vs. SURINDER ANAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order dated 1 -11 -1977 of the City Munsiff Srinagar rejecting the application of the defendant for leave to amend the written statement.

(2.) IN a suit for ejectment brought by the plaintiff against the defendant - petitioner, the defendant was directed to lead evidence in the suit. He submitted an application seeking leave to amend the written statement. By this application the petitioner sought to resist the suit of ejectment on some other additional grounds namely that the suit property is joint and therefore, the plaintiff has no locus standi to institute the suit for ejectment. In the alternative he be allowed to raise the defence that the plaintiff cannot maintain the suit independently without impleading the other co -owners. On these grounds, the suit is not maintainable on account of non -joinder of necessary partise.

(3.) THE application was resisted by the plaintiff He submitted that the application was not bona -fide and the proposed amendment was vague untenable. Even one of the co -owners could institute and maintain the suit for ejectment. The learned Judge after hearing the arguments rejected the application. He found that the application was belated and was made only with a view to protract the proceedings. The defendant -tenant was estopped from disputing the title of the landlord and therefore, he could not be allowed to raise plea that went against the principles enshrined in Section 116 of thee Evidence Act.