IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No.3674 of 2008
Date of decision:17.04.2009
Paramjit Singh ...Petitioner
versus
Bimla Devi and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN
Present: Mr. Nakul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
---
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment ? Yes.
2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? Yes.
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? Yes.
K.KANNAN, J.(Oral)
1. The revision is against an order dismissing an
application for amendment of written statement. The tenant had
originally filed a written statement admitting his status as a tenant but
later sought an amendment of the pleadings contending that the original
owner of the property from whom he took possession had executed a
Will in his favour and that by virtue of the Will, he had himself become
the owner of the property. The Court below dismissed the application.
2. While the Courts shall normally be lenient in
consideration of matters of amendment to the written statement, Courts
shall also see the degree of inconsistency that is sought to be introduced
by the amended pleadings. A person who had admitted his status as
a tenant cannot by virtue of an amendment make a denial of such status
Civil Revision No.3674 of 2008 -2-
and set up title in himself. It will amount to deflecting the whole scope
of proceedings and an amendment that abnegates an admission already
made in the course of proceedings cannot be allowed except under extra
ordinary circumstances. The Court below has approached the issue in
the right perspective and I do not find any extraordinary circumstance
that should occasion a different approach, than how the matter has been
dealt with by the Rent Controller. The revision petition is, therefore,
dismissed.
(K.KANNAN)
17.04.2009 JUDGE
sanjeev