Nand Lal vs Shakuntla Devi and Others

Surjit Singh, J.—Heard and gone through the record.

This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the orders of Rent Controller (dated 16.5.2008) and the Appellate Authority (dated 5.3.2009), whereby his prayer for amending written reply, filed in a petition for his eviction, on the ground of non-payment of rent, has been rejected.

Respondent has filed a petition u/s 14 of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, for the ejectment of the petitioner from certain premises, situate in the Township of Paonta Sahib, on the ground that revision petitioner has not paid rent for certain period. Petitioner filed reply, in which it was stated that the respondent was not the landlord and that in fact one Ram Chander and his brothers were the owners and rent was being collected earlier by Ram Chander and his brothers, but later on the petitioner purchased the property from Ram Chander through a sale deed. Rejoinder was filed in which the plea of the petitioner was controverted by the respondent. Petitioner then filed petition for amending the reply. It was stated that reply was filed to some other petition, which had earlier been filed by the respondent and not to the petition, which has given rise to the present civil revision petition.

By way of amendment, what is sought to be pleaded is that two brothers of Ram Chander died issueless and they had executed a Will, in respect of their shares, in favour of Ram Chander and thereafter petitioner purchased the property, in question, from said Ram Chander. Plea having already been taken in the reply that the petitioner is the owner of the premises, in question, on the basis of sale made in his favour by Ram Chander, there is hardly any need for amendment to show how Ram Chander was the absolute owner, before he sold the premises to the petiioner.

Plea that ram chander is owner, in respect of the shares of his brothers also, on the basis of a Will, is a matter of evidence, which need not be pleaded. Even without making such a plea in the reply, evidence can be adduced to show that Ram Chander was the absolute owner, at the time when he made the alleged sale in favour of the petitioner.

For the foregoing reasons, petition is dismissed.