IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.1332 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision:25.02.2011 Joginder Singh . . .Petitioner Versus Saroj Chadha . . . Respondent ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.Deepali Puri, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J (ORAL) This revision petition is directed against order dated 22.12.2010 passed by the Rent Controller, Ludhiana by which an application for seeking amendment of the written statement to plead certain more facts in the written statement in para 4(a) has been declined on the ground that the same plea has already been taken in para 4 of the written statement and evidence of the petitioner has been concluded after they have been cross-examined. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that if the amendment is not allowed then any evidence led by the petitioner would not be taken into consideration. To my mind this argument is totally fallacious because of the fact that the petitioner wanted to incorporate in the written statement the facts which he wanted to put to the landlord in his cross-examination which does not require to be pleaded. Hence, the present revision petition is found to be devoid of any merit and is hereby dismissed in limine. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) February 25, 2011 JUDGE vivek