M. BHASKAR Vs. VEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has called in question, the order dated 1 -10 -2013, passed by the trial court in O.S. No. 6423/2009 on I.A. 20 vide Annexure -G. By the impugned order at Annexure -G, the trial court has allowed I.A. No. 20 and permitted the respondents -1 and 2 to file their reply/rejoinder to the written statement.

(2.) AGGRIEVED by that, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned order cannot be sustained in law. He also submitted that the claim made by the petitioner in the written statement does not amount to counter claim and therefore, the trial court was not justified in allowing the application. He also submitted that some properties were left out and the petitioner has included them in the written statement and therefore it does not amount to counter claim. He therefore submitted that the impugned order cannot be sustained in law. He placed reliance on the decision of this Court reported in : 2010 (4) KCCR 3014.