JUDGMENT S.N. Srivastava, J.
1. This Civil Revision has been preferred the order dated 14.10.2004, passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 3, Aligarh rejecting application for amendment.
2. Plaintiff/Opp. Party filed a suit for possession after eviction of the Defendant and for recovery of rent, taxes and damages for use and occupation for a sum of Rs. 78,120/- and further recovery of damages for use and occupation at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- per month along with all taxes for future till the date of actual possession on the ground, interalia, that Plaintiff is exclusive owner and land-lady of the front portion of first floor of the building popularly known as "Ghani Mansion" situated at Dodhpur, Civil Lines, Aligarh, Defendant occupied the disputed premises at the rate of monthly rent of Rs. 2000/- per month, tenancy starts from 1st day of each English Calender month and expires on the last day of month, a sum of Rs. 78,120/- is due against Defendant on account of rent and damages for use and occupation from January, 2000 to 15.8.2002, Defendant is going to shift at Pune from Aligarh and has sublet the premises to Mr. Murad Zia and Smt. Bellum Munir for obtaining unlawful gain while the Defendant was legally bound to hand-over vacant possession on vacation of the premises and accordingly tenancy was terminated by a registered notice dated 19.6.2002, hence the Suit.
3. Defendant contested the Suit and denied plaint allegations. In Paragaphs-6 of the written statement she stated that Sushail Ahmad Faizi, husband of answering Defendant and Smt. Belum Munir took first floor portion consisting of three rooms, two kitchens, store-room, gallery, two Varendah, Bathroom and two latrines on rent from Smt. Mumtaz Begum, who was its owner, in the year 1973 and after taking said portion on rent the husband of defendant, his younger brother, who was a small kid at that time, and his sister started living together in the tenanted portion. Liability of payment of alleged taxes, as well initially agreed, was also denied. It was further stated in paragraph-9 of the written statement that Murad Zia younger brother of late Suhail Ahmad Faizi, who was a kid at the time when the disputed accommodation was taken on rent, and Smt. Bellum Munir, sister of Suhail Ahmad Faizi, also lived with his brother and was brought up by his brother and has been continuously living in the tenanted accommodation.
4. By way of an Amendment Defendant wanted to add "said Murad Zia also happens to be co-tenant of said accommodation as one of the heir of late Suhail Ahmad Faizi" in the end of paragraph-6 of the original written statement. An objection to this amendment was filed. By the impugned judgment, the trial Court rejected this application seeking amendment on the ground that proposed amendment is contradictory to the original pleading and is liable to be rejected.
5. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
6. Learned Counsel for revisionist urged that all necessary facts were already pleaded in the original written statement. Murad Zia, younger brother of Late Suhail Ahmad Faizi and Smt. Bellum Munir, sister of Suhail Ahmad Faizi are residing in the tenanted accommodation since very beginning when Murad Zia was a small kid and the amendment is in the nature of clarification to the original pleading in order to enable the Court to adjudicate the case properly. Learned Counsel further urged that trial Court acted illegally with material irregularity while exercising jurisdiction and rejected Amendment Application.
7. In reply to the same Sri Manish Tandon, holding brief of learned Counsel for Opp Party-Caveator, stated that he does not propose to file any counter affidavit and urged that the proposed amendment may be allowed.
8. Considered arguments of learned Counsel for revisionist and perused the materials on record.
9. I am of the view that by the proposed amendment, Defendant has not taken any contrary plea, but this is a clarification of original plea. Residence of Murad Zia, real younger brother of late Suhail Ahmad Faizi since 1973, who was a small kid, and Smt. Bellum Munir, sister of late Suhail Ahmad Faizi when the premises were taken on rent is already in original pleading. Suhail Ahmad Faizi is dead, the only amendment is that Murad Zia who has been residing since beginning of tenancy is contenant as heir of late Suhail Ahmad Faizi. This amendment neither changes the nature of original pleading of the written statement nor plaintiff pleading is affected.
10. In view of the discussions made above, the Court below acted illegally and with material irregularity while exercising jurisdiction in rejecting Amendment Application and amendment application deserved to be allowed.
11. With the result, Civil Revision succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated 14.10.2004 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No, 3, Aligarh is set aside. Amendment Application 35-A is allowed.
12. No order as to cost.