Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ashwani Kumar And Ors vs Om Parkash on 18 November, 2014
Author: Surinder Gupta
Bench: Surinder Gupta
CR-7453-2014 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
Civil Revision No.7453 of 2014 (O&M)
Date of Decision: November 18, 2014.
Ashwani Kumar and another
......PETITIONER(s).
VERSUS
Om Parkash
....RESPONDENT(s).
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA
Present: Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate
for the petitioner (s).
*******
SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)
CM-25631-CII-2014 The application is for placing on record copy of written statement-cum-counter claim Annexures P-5 and replication-cum-reply to the counter claim Annexure P-6.
The same are taken on record subject to all just exceptions. Application stands allowed.
CR-7453-2014 The revision petitioners have challenged order dated 29.09.2014 passed by Appellate Authority, Amritsar (under East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949) whereby application seeking amendment of written statement, was declined.
The revision petitioners, who are tenant in the premises of respondent, sought amendment as mentioned in para 8 and 9 of SACHIN MEHTA 2014.11.27 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CR-7453-2014 -2- application Annexure P-3, which reads as under:-
"8. That with the delivery of possession of the entire ground floor, first floor, second floor and top floor, ample space has been got delivered to the petitioner Om Parkash and the ground floor being a commercial one, ample space has now been available to the petitioner Om Parkash.
9. That the appellant intend the written statement and seeks the amendment in para 5(v) of the written statement which is as follows:-
That the petitioner is having now ample space available with him with the execution and delivery of possession of the premises in execution titled as Bhagwant Kaur versus Ramesh Kumar and others from the Court of Sandeep Singh Josan, Civil Judge (Senior Division), Amritsar on 30.4.2013 and the entire property bearing no.1429/VI-7 Kucha Wasti Ram, Dhab Wasti Ram, Amristar is now in possession of the petitioner and the ground floor of the property having been commercial one. With the delivery of possession of the entire building the petitioner is having ample and more than sufficient commercial/non-residential space available with him. The plea of petitioner that he is not having sufficient space available with him stands negated with the delivery of possession."
Reply given by respondent-landlord to the amendment sought by the petitioner as follows:-
"8. That para no.8 of the application is wrong and SACHIN MEHTA 2014.11.27 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CR-7453-2014 -3- denied. It is wrong and denied that with the delivery of possession of the entire ground floor, first floor, second floor and top floor, ample space has been got delivered to the petitioner Om Parkash. False and frivolous pleas are being taken by the appellant. Earlier the appellants have been alleging that the property in question is a residential property and now they have started alleging that the property is commercial one simply to mislead the Hon'ble Court. The perusal of the ejectment order shows that the ejectment order was made with respect to the house situated at Kacha Wasti Ram, Dhab Wasti Ram, Amritsar and it was the plea in the said case that the applicant's son Sajal Arora who is doing B- Pharmacy at Banglore, will reside in the property in question and the ejectment order was passed by the appellate court and the appellants are well aware of the fact, as they themselves have placed on record copy of the order passed by the Court of Shri Rohsan Lal Chohan, the then Rent Controller, Amritsar who had dismissed the ejectment application of the applicant/now respondent Om Parkash, so it does not lie in the mouth of appellant to say that they want to amend the written statement.
9. That para no.9 of the application is wrong and denied. No such amendment as sought for by the appellants can be allowed to be made in the written statement. The bona fide need of the respondent still exists and has not come to end with delivery of possession of the property which SACHIN MEHTA 2014.11.27 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CR-7453-2014 -4- was under the tenancy of Ramesh Kumar etc. The amendment sought for has got no relevancy with the subject matter of the present appeal."
I have heard learned counsel for the revision petitioners. The amendment sought relates to delivery of possession of premises, which was subject matter of case titled "Bhagwant Kaur Vs. Ramesh Kumar and others. The respondent-landlord has clearly explained in reply that premises in that case was got vacated for personal bona fide requirement of his son Sajal Arora, who has to reside in that premises. The premises in possession of revision petitioners has been sought to be vacated on the ground of personal bona fide requirement of respondent-landlord to start his business after retirement from job in the year 1993. The amendment sought by revision petitioners is irrelevant and appears to be an attempt to further delay proceedings in the matter. The respondent has been litigating with revision petitioners for the last more than 14 years.
This revision petition has no merits and is dismissed. Keeping in view the fact that appeal is pending for the last more than three and half years, Appellate Authority, Amritsar is directed to dispose of the appeal preferably within six months.
Copy of this order be conveyed to the Court concerned.
( SURINDER GUPTA ) November 18, 2014. JUDGE Sachin M. SACHIN MEHTA 2014.11.27 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh