- (1.) RAKESH Tiwari, J. Heard Sri Rajesh Tripathi for the petitioner and Sri K. Shailendra for contesting respondent No. 1.
(2.) THIS petition has been filed for quashing of the impugned order dated 4-3-2005 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hathras in P. A. Case No. 1 of 2002, Raj Kumar v. Vipin Kumar & Ors. By the aforesaid order the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hathras has rejected the application moved by the petitioner for amendment on the ground that it is only a dilatory tactics adopted by the petitioner to delay the decision of the matter. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that an application under Section 21 (1) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972) was filed by the petitioner before the Prescribed Authority which was numbered as P. A. Case No. 1 of 2002, Raj Kumar v. Vipin Kumar & Anr. The application was for eviction of the petitioner from the shop in dispute and it was prayed that the same may be released in favour of the landlord on the ground of bona fide need for himself and his eldest son Sri Ajay Kumar who is unemployed.
(3.) A written statement was filed by the petitioner denying the allegations made in the release application that the need of the landlord is bona fide and that Sri Ajay Kumar, the eldest son of the landlord is unemployed. In fact the landlord is already doing their business from other shops and is earning sufficient income and Sri Ajay Kumar is already employed as a Munim in M/s. Anil & Co. , situated at Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti Yard Hathras. The amendment has been sought on the ground that during the pendency of the aforesaid case certain subsequent developments/events took place and came to the knowledge of the petitioner which he wanted to incorporate by way of amendment in his written statement by way of adding paragraph Nos. 22 (A) to 22 (D ). The amendment application has been appended as Annexure 3 to the writ petition.;