Point of Law: Amendment may be justifiably allowed where it is intended to rectify absence of material relevant in plaint.

JUDGMENT :

(Sandeep Sharma, J.)

1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 12.10.2022, passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Court No.1, Dehra, District Kangra, H.P., whereby an application bearing C.M.A No.385 of 2021, having been filed by respondent/plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC for amendment of plaint came to be allowed, petitioner/tenant has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein to set aside the aforesaid order and reject the application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with section 151 CPC.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that respondent/plaintiff instituted eviction petition under Section 14 { 2(i), 2(ii)a} & 14 {2(v)} of H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 against the petitioner/respondent on the ground of arrears of rent and subletting, but before framing of issues respondent/plaintiff filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with section 151 CPC, seeking amendment of plaint on the ground that premises sought to be evicted are also bonafidely required for use of wife of respondent/landlord and his daughter-in-law, who intend to expand her business of boutique in the existing residential building.

3. Aforesaid prayer made on behalf of the respondent/plaintiff came to be resisted on behalf of petitioner/tenant, who submitted that in the event of petition being allowed, entire nature and complexion of the suit would be changed. Learned trial court on the basis of pleadings adduced on record by the respective parties allowed the application and as a result of which, petitioner also came to be permitted to seek eviction on the ground of bonafide requirement along with other grounds of arrears of rent and subletting. In the aforesaid background, petitioner/tenant has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein to set aside the order impugned in the instant proceedings.

4. I have heard learned counsel representing the parties and gone through the record.

5. Having heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused the material available on record vis-a-vis reasoning assigned in the impugned order, this Court finds no illegality and infirmity and as such, no interference is called for.

6. Undoubtedly, at the first instance, petition for eviction came to be instituted on behalf of respondent/plaintiff on the ground of arrears of rent and subletting, but before framing of issues, he filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC seeking amendment to the effect that demised premises are also required to be evicted on the ground of bonafide requirement. Though Mr. Vishal Bindra, learned counsel representing the petitioner/tenant vehemently argued that proposed amendment, if allowed, would change the entire complexion of suit/petition, but this Court finds no merit in the aforesaid submissions for the reason that petition sought to be amended is for eviction, may be initially filed on the ground of arrears of rent and subletting, but consequence would remain same in case, additional ground of bonafide requirement sought to be raised by the respondent /plaintiff, is permitted to be raised by way of amendment.

7. Careful perusal of the provision of Order 6 Rule 17 CPC clearly reveals that Court may at any stage permit parties to lis to alter or amend their pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just and which may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties. No doubt, proviso to aforesaid provision suggests that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the commencement of the trial. In the case at hand, it is not in dispute that application for amendment came to be filed on behalf of the respondent/plaintiff prior to commencement of trial because issues are yet to be framed.

8. Mr. Bindra, learned counsel representing the petitioner/tenant argued that ground sought to be raised by way of amendment on bonafide requir