IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.3674 of 2008 Date of decision:17.04.2009 Paramjit Singh ...Petitioner versus Bimla Devi and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Nakul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. --- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? Yes. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? Yes. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? Yes. K.KANNAN, J.(Oral) 1. The revision is against an order dismissing an application for amendment of written statement. The tenant had originally filed a written statement admitting his status as a tenant but later sought an amendment of the pleadings contending that the original owner of the property from whom he took possession had executed a Will in his favour and that by virtue of the Will, he had himself become the owner of the property. The Court below dismissed the application. 2. While the Courts shall normally be lenient in consideration of matters of amendment to the written statement, Courts shall also see the degree of inconsistency that is sought to be introduced by the amended pleadings. A person who had admitted his status as a tenant cannot by virtue of an amendment make a denial of such status Civil Revision No.3674 of 2008 - 2 - and set up title in himself. It will amount to deflecting the whole scope of proceedings and an amendment that abnegates an admission already made in the course of proceedings cannot be allowed except under extra ordinary circumstances. The Court below has approached the issue in the right perspective and I do not find any extraordinary circumstance that should occasion a different approach, than how the matter has been dealt with by the Rent Controller. The revision petition is, therefore, dismissed. (K.KANNAN) 17.04.2009 JUDGE sanjeev