commercial building. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that if the intention of the petitioner/landlord was to demolish his residential building, it was not necessary to file the Rent Control Petitions at all for that purpose, since the house was occupied by the landlord himself. According to the counsel, this itself shows that there is an evident mistake in the plan and it can be proved only on production of the relevant records. We are of the view that the prayer made in I.A.No.2185 of 2012, if allowed, would not cause any prejudice to the respondents/tenants. On the other hand, it would enable the Court to finally and completely adjudicate upon the disputes involved in the case. No party should be allowed to take advantage of the mistake, if any, occurred in the official records. We are of the view that summoning the relevant records and recalling PW2 and recording his evidence would only enable the Court to find out the truth. It would also enable the parties to have a fair fight on the real issues involved in the cases. According to us, the court below should have allowed I.A.No.2185 of 2012. Accordingly, we set aside the order in I.A.No.2185 of 2012 and allow that application.
