IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 7197 of 2011 Date of Decision: 23.11.2011 *** M/s Narinder Pal Singh .. Petitioner VS. Smt. Parkash Kaur .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. Rajinder Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The petitioner-tenant is aggrieved with order dated 24.9.2011 by virtue of which his application seeking permission to amend the written statement has been dismissed. Heard. By the proposed amendment the petitioner wants to raise the plea that the premises from which his eviction has been sought is part of residential property and has been changed to commercial one and, therefore, a residential property cannot be got vacated for commercial purposes. It is apparent that such a plea in respect of the tenanted property, which is in possession of the petitioner himself, was available to the petitioner from the very inception of the case, but despite that he failed to take any such plea. Even it has not been shown by the petitioner that despite exercise of due diligence the fact sought to be incorporated in the written statement could not be mentioned in the written statement. It is apparent from the perusal of paper book that the impugned application was filed by the petitioner when the landlord concluded his evidence and the case was fixed for his evidence. Therefore, finding the same as a device to fill up the lacuna and to delay the proceedings, the learned trial Court rightly dismissed the application. The instant petition, being without any merit, is accordingly dismissed in limine. November 23,2011 (ARVIND KUMAR) Jiten JUDGE