High Courts

Dhiraj Singh vs District Judge,Agra and Others

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 2 December 1999 · Citation: (1999) 12 AHC CK 0055

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.N.Agarwal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 6 Rule 17
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 50385 of 1999
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 289 words

Sudhir Narain, J.—This writ petition is directed against the order dated 2771999 passed by the Judge Small Causes Court rejecting the amendment application filed by the petitioner and the order of the Revisional Court dated 8101999 affirming the said order in revision.

2.

The plaintiffrespondent filed suit for recovery of arrears of rent, ejectment and damages against the petitioner on the ground that he committed default in payment of arrears of rent and was liable for eviction. The petitioner filed written statement. In the written statement it was stated that he is a tenant of Rs. 20/ per month and not Rs. 150/ per month as claimed by the plaintiff. In Paragraph 9 of the written statement it was slated that the plaintiff and his father Sri B.D. Gupta had started to demand Rs. 35,000/ as Pagree of the shop and on refusal by the defendant they have started threatening him to dispossess forcibly and get the shop vacated from him.

3.

After 12 years of filing the written statement the petitioner filed an application for amendment of his written statement on 1931999 alleging that the plaintiffs had let out the shop in question on a monthly rent of Rs. 20/ on receiving consideration of Rs. 36,000/ from him. This averment was inconsistent from the averment made in the original written statement wherein it was stated that Rs. 35,000/ was demanded from the defendant and that was refused.

4.

The Trial Court rightly rejected the amendment application. The suit was filed on 1987 and is pending. Respondent No. 2 is directed to decide the suit within three months. The Registry shall send a copy of this order to respondent No. 2.

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed.