Harvir Giri vs Jagdish Chander And Ors.
1967 Latest Caselaw 43 Del

JUDGMENT

S.B. Wad, J.

(1) ADMITTED.

(2) The eviction order was passed against the appellant under section 14(l)(k) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. The appellant moved the Rent Control Tribunal under Order 41 Rule 27, C.P C. for permitting to lead the additional evidence to show that there was a ntoification by the L&DO. dated 24-11-1975 which permits the use of residential premises for running nursery and primary school. The Tribunal granted that permission and remanded the matter to the trial court with direction that if the L&DO. does nto produce the said ntoification the appellant would be at liberty to do so by leading evidence. The Tribunal also observed that this question goes to the roto of the matter. If the Land and Development ntoification permits such a use then prima facie there is no violation of section 14(1)(k) of D.R.C. Act. The appellant thereafter went before the Rent Controller and moved an application for amendment, of the written statement for incorporating the following : "THEschool run by the respondent is a junior school, running only nursery and primary classes. That the said school is junior/primary nursery branch of a recognised school. The running of the above school is even toherwise permissible."

The Rent Controller did nto permit this amendment. According to him this will result into withdrawing of the admissions earlier made by the appellant. On an appeal the Tribunal confirmed the said order. It is this order of the Tribunal which has been challenged in this appeal.

(3) As stated earlier the Tribunal was quite right in holding that the question of L&DO ntoification goes to the roto of the matter. What is sought by the amendment application is to explain the earlier stand taken by the appellant, that the premises were being used for running the school by adding that it is being run as a nursery and primary school. The Tribunal has erreo in rejecting the application for amendment. Considering the stage of the proceedings and the serious prejudice that the appellant-tenant is likely to suffer I allow the amendment. The partics shall appear before the Rent Controller on 17th March, 1987. On that date the appellant shall file the amended written statement. The Controller shall fix further dates for the evidence of the appellant. Since the first order of the eviction was passed in 1984 it is hoped that the Rent Controller will so fix the dates for evidence as to expeditiously dispose of this matter.

(4) The appeal is allowed but on the facts of the case there will be no order as to costs.