HARSUMANTHASASTRI MAHADEVASASTRI PURANIK Vs. MADHAVA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants I.A No. VI filed in the lower court for cmendment of the written statement, whereby, in substance they sought to introduce the relief of counterclaim seeking a declaration as to their title to the temple etc., and that they are the Wahivatdars and Poojaries of the subject-matter of the suit, etc., was rejected, by the lower court on the ground that, at the present stage of the suit, the same cannot be allowed It was held that written statement was filed in September 1983, issues were framed on 3-8-1984 and the plaintiff No. 3 was examined as P W. 1, on 28-11-1985. The I A. in question was filed only on 13-12-1985. According to the learned Munsiff, counter claim has to be made on or before filing the written statement, as per Order 8 rule 6-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. A decision of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in Bank of Baroda v Gurucharan Singh (AIR 1986 P & H 252) was relied.

(2.) A perusal of the written statement as filed earlier shows that, the necessary basic facts leading to the relief now sought to be claimed by the defendants, have been pleaded, at para-9 thereof. The averments now sought to be introduced in no way introduces any new set of assertions. if it is a case of an amendment of the written statement simpliciter under Or. 6 Rl 17 CPC, the leave to amend could have been granted without much pondering over the question.

(3.) The basic question involved here is whether, a counter-claim can be preferred after filing of the written statement. in the aforesaid decision of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, it was held that,-