SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(P&H) 91

VIKAS BAHL
Sharad Aggarwal – Appellant
Versus
Manjit Kaur – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Raj Kumar Kakkar Adv.

JUDGMENT :

Vikas Bahl, J.

This is a revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside/quashing of order dated 25.11.2024 (Annexure P-9) passed by the Rent Authority vide which the Rent Authority had dismissed an application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC filed by the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had taken several points at the time of filing an application for leave to contest, which was filed on 09.03.2018, however inadvertently in the reply filed by the petitioner-tenant to the petition under the Rent Act, all the said points could not be taken. It is submitted that it was only at the time of preparing the evidence of the tenant that the said mistake came to the notice of the counsel and accordingly, an application was moved for amendment of the written statement. It is submitted that vide order dated 25.11.2024, the said application has been dismissed illegally and the said order deserves to be set aside and the application filed by the petitioner for amendment of the written statement deserves to be allowed.

3. This Court has heard learned counsel for the petitioner and has perused the pa

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
    whatsapp-icon Back to top