Order 12

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: PPA No. 06/2024
M/s Billiardiers (Regd.) vs LIC
20.09.2025
Present: Sh. Gaurav Goyal and Sh.Vaibhav Sharma, Ld.
Counsels for appellant.
Sh. G. K. Sharma, Ld. Counsel for respondent.
I have considered the application pending on record
under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC on behalf of appellant seeking
amendment in the prayer clause of the present appeal. It is stated
in the application that there are certain developments after the
filing of the present appeal and due to actions and conduct of the
respondent during the pendency of the present appeal, the
amendments are necessitated. The prayer clause of the appeal
needs to be amended.
As per the record, the original prayer clause is as
follows:-
“(a) Allow the appeal of the appellant thereby setting
aside the impugned recovery order dated 18.01.2024
passed by the Ld. Estate Officer in case no.14 of 2017;
(b) call for the records of the case in issue.
(c) pass such further and other orders as this Hon'ble
Court deem fit, just and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case."
As per application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC,
fresh prayer clause is as follows:-
-- 1 of 3 --
(a) Allow the appeal of the appellant thereby setting
aside the impugned eviction order dated 18.01.2024
passed by the Ld Estate Officer in case no.14 of 2017.
(b) Pass an order thereby declaring that the impugned
eviction order dated 18.01.2024 passed by the Ld. Estate
Officer in case no. 14/2017 is bad in law on the ground
that the Respondent has issued the Notice dated
28.12.2016 on false and frivolous grounds;
(c) Pass an order thereby declaring that the Ld. Estate
Officer has committed an error in declaring the
Appellant as an unauthorised occupant solely on the
basis "Ashoka Marketing Ltd Vs PNB" and its entire
reliance upon the issuance and service of the Legal
Notice dated 26-28.12.2016 by the Respondent;
(d) Pass an order thereby declaring that the period
between the termination of the lease of the demised
premises and the final date of decision by this Hon'ble
Court in the present case be treated as a zero period;
(e) Pass an order thereby restoring the rights of the
Appellant with respect to the lease of the demised
premises on the date of legal notice without affecting the
rights of the Appellant for renewal of lease of the
demised premises;
(f) Pass an order thereby directing the Respondent to pay
costs as damages in favour of the Appellant for the
obstructions caused in carrying out the occupation of the
Appellant, wrongful losses incurred by the Appellant on
a daily basis and due to violation of fundamental rights
of the Constitution of India of the Appellant;
(g) call for the records of the case in issue; and
-- 2 of 3 --
(h) pass such further and other orders as this Hon'ble
Court deem fit, just and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case."
On consideration of the prayer clauses enumerated
above, I find that basic prayer of the appellant is against the
eviction order dated 18.01.2024 passed by the Estate officer. The
new clauses proposed by the amendments are nothing but the
grounds of the appeal and they cannot be a part of the prayer
clause. Appellant is at liberty to plead all the grounds during the
arguments in the present appeal. Application is misconceived
and seems to have been moved just to delay the present
proceedings. Application is accordingly dismissed.
Time sought to argue on the present appeal.
Both the sides are directed to argue on the present
appeal on the next date of hearing failing which no further
opportunity would be granted and court would proceed as per
law.
Put up for arguments on 13.11.2025.
(Anju Bajaj Chandna)
Principal District & Sessions Judge
New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts
ND/20.09.2025
-- 3 of 3 --