IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.1701 of 2006 Date of Decision:- 20.05.2008 Shanta Rani LR of Amrit Lal ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.Salil Sagar, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Asheem Kataria, Advocate. vs. Nasib Kaur ....Respondent(s) through Mr.Akshay Kumar Goyal, Advocate. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 3.3.2006 passed by the Rent Controller, Jalandhar on the apprehension as if the petitioner's application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC moved for amendment of the leave to contest application, has been declined. Before adverting to the impugned order, the facts may be noticed briefly. The respondent-landlady has filed a petition under Section 13- B of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 against the petitioner. The petitioner has filed a written statement along with an application seeking leave to defend. Meanwhile, it appears that another ejectment petition filed by the respondent-landlady's son under Section 13-B of the Act has been allowed and an eviction order in respect of one of the shops has been passed in his favour. C.R. No.1701 of 2006 -2- The petitioner-tenant wanted to bring the above-mentioned subsequent events on record by seeking amendment of her leave to contest the ejectment application. The learned Rent Controller vide the impugned order has taken notice of the ejectment order dated 14.5.2004 passed in favour of the respondent-landlady's son (Kuldeep Singh) and adjourned the matter after observing that the aforesaid eviction order shall be taken into consideration at the time of deciding the application for leave to contest. It would, thus, be seen that the petitioner's amendment application has not been dismissed. At the same time, the petitioner appears to be apprehending that in the absence of a specific plea by her in her application for leave to contest, the learned Rent Controller may not take into consideration the above-noticed subsequent events. In order to wipe out the above-noticed apprehension and taking into consideration the fair stand taken by learned counsel for the respondent, this revision petition is partly allowed to the extent that the petitioner-tenant may file an amended application for leave to contest within three weeks from today and thereafter the said Court shall proceed with to decide the same in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Rent Controller on 12.6.2008. Disposed of. Dasti. May 20, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE