Kuldip Singh, J

This judgment shall dispose of CR No.114 of 2011 and CR No.148 of 2011. CR No.114 of 2011

2. The order dated 24.5.2010 in RBT case No.34-2/09 of 2000 pending before learned Rent Controller(7), Shimla dismissing the application for reviewing the order dated 29.9.2008 under Order 6 rule 17 CPC has been assailed in the revision. The order dated 29.9.2008 has also been assailed.

3. The further facts are that respondents-landlords had filed petition for fixation and enhancement of rent of the premises under the H.P. Urban Rent Controller, Act 1987 against petitioner which is being contested by petitioner on several grounds including the ground that petitioner in the individual capacity is neither tenant nor has any concern with the premises for which the petition has been filed.

4. The petitioner moved an application under Order 6 rule 17 CPC for amendment of reply which was contested by respondents. The application was dismissed by learned Rent Controller on 29.9.2008 on the ground that trial has already commenced and as per the amended Order 6 rule 17 CPC, the petitioner was required to show that inspite of due diligence, the petitioner could not raise the matt