The crucial date for determining the landlord's bonafide need is the date of the petition, and subsequent developments cannot be considered to diminish that need.

1. - The petitioner-tenant has laid the present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for assailing the part of the order dated 11th May 2012 passed by the learned Appellate Rent Tribunal, Udaipur (for short, 'the Tribunal') whereby the learned Tribunal has rejected the application of the petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of written statement.

2. By the impugned order, the learned Tribunal has decided two applications submitted on behalf of the petitioner- tenant. The application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC for taking additional documents on record was allowed but the application for amendment in the pleadings was declined.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant Mr. Rajesh Shah has argued that having granted the indulgence to the petitioner-tenant on his application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC, the learned Tribunal ought to have allowed the amendment in the written statement because those amendments were consequential. Mr. Shah has further submitted that the proposed amendment in the written statement was just and by seeking amendment the petitioner-tenant has made endevour to place on record certain subsequent events which have definite bearing on the matter. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further urged that the amendment prayed for on behalf of the petitioner-tenant was necessary for disproving reasonable bonafide necessary of the respondent-landlord for the disputed premises. In support of his arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a judgment of the Apex Court in case of S.J. Ebenzezer v. Velayudhan & Ors., AIR 1988 SC 746 . The Apex Court in that case while examining the grounds of bonafide need of the landlord and examining the importance of pleading and proof in such proceedings has made following observations in Para 8 of the judgment:

8. It is common fact that the principal ground on which the landlord sought eviction was that the building in his occupation was under immediate threat of acquisition by the Town Planning Authority under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. It is again an undisputed fact that in the pleadings the first respondent required the premises in question for his residence and to conduct his 'affairs'. He has not disclosed in the application what those 'affairs' are. However, at the time of giving evidence he has submitted that he required the building for running his business which he is presently running in the premises in his occupation. The business mentioned by the first respondent was that of Travel agency, It is also an admitted fact that the first respondent was running his business in a room in Mascot Hotel. The Rent Controller, who had the opportunity of observing the demeanour of the witness, has stated as follows:-

"Even though the applicant would state that he needs the building to conduct his 'affairs' in the application he has not cared to disclose what those 'affairs' are. Nevertheless, at the time of enquiry he has disclosed those 'affairs'. According to him he needs the building for funding his business which is now being run in premises No.13/1412. His business by way appears to be some travel agency. it would appear from the allegations that he needs this building since the building bearing door number 13/1412 is about to be acquired for some public purpose., Any how at the time of his cross examination he admitted that the Town Planning Scheme for which T.C. 13/1412 is about to be acquired envisages alternate accommodation to those who will be affected by the Scheme. If that be so there is no need to get the disputed building vacated. Probably due to this difficulty that the applicant was forced to sweat in the course of his cross examination that even if the Town planning Scheme does not materialise he had an idea to shift his business from the existing T.C. 13/1412. His evidence shows that he is very often altering his position to suit his convenience as the situation deman