Jagdish Chandra Gupta, J. - (1.) HEARD petitioner's counsel and Sri M.A. Qadir who is appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2. In the peculiar circumstances of the case and with the consent of the parties' counsel, the petition is disposed of finally.
(2.) THE writ petition is directed against the order rejecting the petitioner's application for amendment in the written statement whereby the petitioner sought to introduce the plea that he had not been served with any notice as contemplated by the first proviso to Section 21(1)(a) which requires that the landlord has to give a notice of the fact of purchase of the property by him and same has to be served upon the tenant not less that six months before the date of moving an application under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act therefore, the application of the landlord was legally not maintainable. The lower appellate Court has rejected the said application on the ground that it is mala fide and has been moved to delay the disposal of the appeal. Sri Qadir submitted that on earlier occasion another application for amendment was moved by the petitioner in the appeal, to the effect that the respondent is not the sole landlord of the suit property and the same was rejected with the observation that the said respondent has been admitted by the tenant to be his landlord inasmuch as in reply to the notice given by the landlord after he had purchased property, tenant admitted the relationship of landlord and tenant. He further argued that in any view of the matter since the petitioner did not raise any plea of want of notice before the Prescribed Authority, he is estopped from raising the same before the appellate court and the plea would be deemed to have been waived by him. He further submitted that arguments have already been heard in appeal and only judgment is to be delivered whereas Sri Rajesh Tandon disputes this factual position. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of finally with the observation that in case arguments have not been concluded, the petitioner shall be permitted to raise the aforesaid legal plea orally and if such a plea is raised, the appellate court shall decide the same including the objection about the waiver of the said plea.;