Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: ejectment execution in Sunil Badhan vs Tarsem Singh on 1 September, 2011Matching Fragments
Consequently,present application being devoid of any merits is hereby declined. Now to come up on 07.05.2011 for evidence of respondent.
It is not in dispute that the shop measuring 6ft x 6 ft. for which the petitioner is seeking amendment, has been made available to him only on 05.02.2011, when he got the possession of the aforesaid shop in execution of ejectment order dated 08.03.2010. It is also a matter of record that the petitioner has moved instant application, immediately i.e.on 16.03.2011 and without causing any delay. Not only this, by way of the aforesaid amendment, petitioner only wants to bring on record the additional facts regarding the availability of additional accommodation to him which has come into existence after filing of the petition. The aforesaid amendment is not going to change the nature of the petition, in any manner.