Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

As both these petitions arise out of the same rent proceedings which have been initiated against the present petitioners by the land owners under the provisions of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, they are being decided vide common judgment.

2. The petitioners are aggrieved by order dated 16.11.2022, in terms whereof, an application filed by the petitioners under Order 7, Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code has been dismissed and also by an order passed by the learned Rent Controller, dated 16.11.2022, in an application filed under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure by the land owners, in terms thereof, the apPplication has been allowed and the prayer of the applicants therein to carry out certain amendments in the petition has been allowed.

3. Learned Counsel for the petit ioners herein submitted that the eviction petition was vague, incomplete, was not containing the details of the demised premises and it was in this backdrop that the petitioners filed an application under Order 7, Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code. As per him, the application has been erroneously rejected by the learned Court below.

4. Before proceeding further, it may be