IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.8232 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 17.12.2010 Balwinder Kaur ....Petitioner Versus Rajiv Kumar Jindal and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr.Aman Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. There is no legal infirmity in the impugned order. The petitioner, who is a tenant, is facing eviction proceedings. Respondent No.1 has sought the eviction of the petitioner on the ground of personal necessity. The petitioner in his contest has taken up the defence that the respondent is already having more shops to his credit. By virtue of the amendment he wants to delay the proceedings. The evidence is over and the matter is now fixed for arguments. Such type of defence cannot be permitted to be pleaded at this stage for the simple reason that even though the law of amendment is liberal, yet it has to be seen from the facts of each case that if the petitioner has not shown due diligence to plead sthe facts which were in his knowledge, the same cannot be permitted to be pleaded subsequently at a stage after the evidence is over. No ground to interfere. C.R.No.8232 of 2010 (O&M) -2- Dismissed. 17.12.2010 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss