Sunita Agarwal, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) By means of the present writ petition, petitioner is challenging the order passed by the appellate authority rejecting the amendment application filed by the petitioner under Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C..
(3.) Admittedly the release application was filed in the year 2010 under section 21(1) (a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 which was registered as P.A. case no. 41 of 2010 (Daya Shankar Singh v. Lalla Prasad). The release application was contested by the petitioner-tenant on various grounds, which was allowed on 4.4.2013 and need of the landlord was found genuine. In the pending appeal, namely, Rent Appeal No. 11 of 2014, petitioner tenant had filed amendment application at the stage of argument.The amendments which are sought to be incorporated have been found to be misconceived by the appellate authority under the Rent Control Act and the application was rejected vide order dated 8.5.2015.;