IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.5375 of 2010 Date of decision: 19th November, 2010 Dr. Narinder Kaushal … Petitioner Versus Virinder Mohan Mohindra … Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Vivek Suri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjay Tangri, Advocate for the respondent. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) It is an admitted fact that the petitioner-tenant had led evidence that during the pendency of the eviction petition, landlord had let out the shop to one Sanjay Prashar. However, in consonance with the evidence led, pleading was not made in the written statement as it was a subsequent event. During the pendency of the appeal, three paras, viz. Para Nos. 3, 4 and 5, have been sought to be introduced as preliminary objection Nos.3 to 5. These paras have been reproduced in para No.6 of the application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC. Mr. Sanjay Tangri, Advocate appearing for the respondent- landlord, has submitted that if the amendment is allowed, it will cause unnecessary delay in adjudication of the appeal. It is further submitted that the alleged fact that the shop was let out, was in knowledge of the petitioner, during the pendency of the ejectment petition. Counsel for the petitioner, to controvert the submissions made by Mr.Tangri, has stated that in case the proposed amendment is allowed, he will not lead any evidence. Civil Revision No.5375 of 2010 At this stage, counsel for the respondent has stated that in case decision of the appeal is made time-bound and the petitioner is burdened with a cost and no evidence is led by the petitioner in support of the proposed amendment, he will not have any serious objection thereto, provided his right to repel the amendment is safeguarded. This Court is of the opinion that counsel for the respondent- landlord has taken a very fair stand and thus, the present petition is hereby disposed of with following directions: (a) The application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC for amendment to the written statement is allowed; (b) As stated by counsel for the petitioner, no evidence shall be led by him in support of the pleadings made by way of amendment; (c) The appellate Court shall give all reasonable opportunities to the landlord to repel the pleadings made by way of amendment in a reasonable manner; (d) After the opportunity is availed by the landlord to repel the amendment, the appeal shall be decided within three months thereafter; (e) For making prayer of amendment to the written statement at a belated stage, the petitioner-tenant is saddled with a cost of Rs.5,000/-, on payment whereof, the proposed amendment shall be allowed. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE November 19, 2010 rps 2