Kashmiri Pandit Sabha (Regd.) vs Oriental Glass Works

S.D. Anand, J.—Initially, the petitioner-landlord had raised a plea of personal bonafide necessity as tenanted premises were required for holding Kirtan/Satsang and worship by general public and other various religious activities. In the course of the trial, the landlord-petitioner applied for amendment to include therein a plea that the tenanted premises are also required for housing Kashmiri migrants who had initially shifted to Jammu but had been compelled to shift to Amritsar thereafter.

The plea was negatived by the learned Trial Court by observing that the trial had already commenced and the petitioner-landlord had not been able to indicate why this plea could not be raised earlier by exercise of due diligence.

Learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, states that the Kashmiri migrants migrated from Jammu to Amritsar after the filing of the petition and it is on that account only that the need to amendment arose.

It is apparent from the material obtaining on the file that the petitioner-Kashmiri Pandit Sabha (Regd.) raised a plea of personal bonafide necessity for a number of items including the user thereof for various religious activities. The provision for housing a person displaced from the native place is nothing short of a religious activity. Even otherwise, that ground became available to the petitioner-landlord only in the course of the trial. Though the trial has commenced, the evidence of the respondent/tenant has not yet concluded.

In the light of the foregoing discussion, the petition shall stand allowed. The impugned order dated 27.8.2009 shall stand set aside. The petitioner shall be entitled to amend the petition and to aver therein that tenanted premises are also required for housing the Kashmiri migrants who had to shift from Jammu to Amritsar.

Learned Counsel for the respondent states that the allowance of the plea may give rise to further inordinate delay in the disposal of the rent petition.

In that context, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-landlord states that the petitioner herein would avail of only one adjournment to conclude his evi-dence in the light of the amendment and that the witness(es) who are examined would not touch the already indicated counts of personal bonafide necessity and would confine themselves to the issue of requirement for the Kashmiri migrants who had shifted from Jammu to Amritsar. The parties, through their learned Counsel, are directed to appear on 10.3.2010. The petitioner herein shall conclude evidence by or on 28.3.2010. The respondent shall, thereafter, conclude his evidence by 15.4.2010. The learned Counsel for the respondent assures that the evidence would be concluded much before that date. The trial itself shall be concluded by the learned Trial Court by or on 15.4.2010.