- (1.) Challenge in this revision petition is the order dated 24.4.2012 passed by Ms. Shalini Singh Nagpal, learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh vide which the appeal preferred by the landlord for amendment of the rent petition was accepted after setting aside the order dated 2.1.2012 passed by the Rent Controller dismissing the application for amendment of the petition. Briefly stated that Nand Lal filed eviction petition against tenant-Ashok Kumar Jog. The landlord Nand Lal now respondent wanted to add paragraph 6-A in the petition, the detailed of which is given as under :- 6A. That it will not out of place to mention here that the petitioner applied for allotment of LIG H.No. 869, Sector 40-A Chandigarh giving address of his brother-in-law Arjan Dass (now deceased) i.e. H.No. 534 Sector 11 Chandigarh, however, the petitioner never resided in H.No. 534 Sector 11 Chandigarh, but as and when the petitioner came to Chandigarh the petitioner stayed with his brother-in-law Shri Arjan Dass (Now deceased). Thereupon said House No. 869, LIG Sector 40-A, Chandigarh was allotted to the petitioner by the Chandigarh Housing Board. But the petitioner sold the said house to Smt. Amarjit Kaur w/o Sh. Labh Singh on the basis of agreement to sell dated 30.6.1996, General Power of Attorney and Will. Ultimately the said house has been sold by the purchaser Smt. Amarjit Kaur to Anil Prabha Madhok to whom the said house has been transferred by the Chandigarh Housing Board. Thereafter, the petitioner purchased H.No. 2786 Sector 37-C, Chandigarh on the basis of General Power of Attorney in the year 1995 itself and the same was again sold to Smt. Charanjit Kaur vide Sub General Power of Attorney dated 13.10.1996 and agreement to sell and affidavit was also executed by the petitioner in favour of Smt. Charanjit Kaur. Thus the petitioner remained in possession of the said H.No. 869, LIG Sector 40-A, Chandigarh till 30.06.1995 and vacated the same on the sale of the said house to the said Smt. Amarjit Kaur. Thereafter, the petitioner started residing in H.No. 2786, Sector 37-C, Chandigarh for a very short period and ultimately the petitioner vacated the said house on its sale to Smt. Charanjit Kaur. After the sale of said house No. 2786 Sector 37-C, Chandigarh the petitioner purchased the present House No. 679 Sector 40-A, Chandigarh where the petitioner and his family is residing since October, 1996 continuously. Thus, because of the sale of the said houses, the petitioner vacated the same for a sufficient cause after enforcement of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949.
(2.) It is pleaded that the said fact regarding occupation of the aforesaid house could not be inadvertently given in the plaint. Similar prayer was made to add in paragraph No. 7-A in the petition.
(3.) The said application was resisted by the tenant by filing written reply. It is pleaded that proceedings in the eviction petition has already commenced and as such application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short - the CPC) is not maintainable. Shri S.K. Sharma, Rent Controller, Chandigarh vide order dated 2.1.2012 dismissed the application. Nand Lal landlord filed appeal against the said order and the learned Appellate Authority vide order dated 24.4.2012 allowed the necessary amendment.;