High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Krishandas Deonath v. Smt. Munni Devi - WRIT - A No. - 57313 of 2007  RD-AH 18074 (20 November 2007)
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
In a pending application under Section 21 (1) (a) of Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Lettings, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (in short, the Act) in P.A. Suit No. 30/2003 Smt. Munni Devi vs. Krishnadas Deonath, the trial court rejected the application for amending the written statement on 22.9.2007 on the ground that the evidence has been closed and that the facts sought to be introduced by amendment in the plaint, have been stated in the evidence. The appeal under Section 23 of the Act was dismissed on 26.10.2007, as not maintainable.
The law, with regard to amendment of the pleadings, was amended by Act No. 22 of 2002, enforcing CPC (Amendment) Act of 1999, by adding a proviso to Order VI Rule 17 of C.P.C. w.e.f. 1.7.2002, providing therein, that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced, unless the court comes to the conclusion that inspite of the due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial.
A perusal of the application for amendment would show that the petitioner-tenant has not given the dates on which the shops are alleged to be let out by the respondent-landlord without allotment and the dates on which the fresh constructions were made by the landlord including the shop vacated by another tenant with the residential house in his occupation. The petitioner has not denied that these facts have already come on record in the evidence led by the tenant.
I do not find any error in the order of the trial court rejecting the amendment application. The writ petition is dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.