( 1 ) WHETHER or not learned Single Judge in the impugned order passed on 19. 12. 2000 has correctly exercised discretion by allowing plaintiffs/respondents to amend the plaint. This is the short question arising for determination in this appeal preferred by the defendant.

( 2 ) ON 12. 11. 1997 plaintiffs filed a suit against the defendant claiming a decree for possession of property known as No. 7/25, Nazafgarh Road, Industrial Area, Kirti nagar, New Delhi and for recovery of Rs. 6 lakhs towards arrears of damages @ Rs. 2 lakhs per month w. e. f. 12. 8. 1997 and for future damages @ Rs. 2 lakhs per month from the date of institution of the suit till delivery of possession alongwith the interest on damages @ 12% p. a. with effect from the date of the institution of the suit.

( 3 ) THE suit was instituted alleging that the defendant was inducted,on the land as a lessee through agreement dated 12. 1. 1965 on a monthly rental of Rs. 3,850. 00. Lease initially was for a period of three years which expired by efflux of time on 11. 11. 1968. Defendant, however, continued to occupy premises as a tenant from month to month on same terms and conditions. No fresh lease was exec