SUSHIL KUMAR Vs. LRS OF LATE RANJANA BEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though listed on an application filed under Article N#ACA401#N226 (3) of the Constitution of India, however, with the consent and at the request of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter has been heard finally at this stage itself.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the relevant facts and background aspects of the matter are that in the suit for eviction on the ground of reasonable and bona fide requirement, filed way back in the year 1996, the original plaintiff Smt.Ranjana Ben expired on 24.12.2006; and her legal representatives were ordered to be substituted as plaintiffs on 19.05.2008. Thereafter, on 21.07.2008, the defendant-petitioner moved an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC with the submissions that the requirement as stated in the plaint has come to an end as the original plaintiff has expired and the premises of her possession were lying vacant; and only one son of the plaintiff was residing at Mount Abu and other children have not come to Mount Abu at all. The defendant-petitioner prayed that such subsequent events particularly arising due to demise of the original2 plaintiff deserve to be taken on record and hence, he be allowed to amend the written statement.

(3.) The learned Trial Court has proceeded to reject the application by the impugned order dated 08.05.2009 with the cursory observation that only for the subsequent event of the death of the original plaintiff, the requirement does not come to an end.