BABY Vs. SEBASTIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, the grievance of the Petitioner, Defendant in the suit is that his application for leave of the court for filing additional written statement under Order VIII, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure was dismissed by the learned Subordinate Judge on the reason that the proposed additional written statement does not raise a plea of counter-claim or set off. Ext.P-5 is the impugned order.

(2.) I have heard the submissions of Sri G. Sreekumar Chelur, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and also those of Sri Jijo Paul, learned Counsel for the Respondent-Plaintiff.

(3.) Flaying Ext. P-5 order, Sri G. Sreekumar would submit that the view of the learned Subordinate Judge that additional pleadings under Order VIII, Rule 9 of the Code are contemplated from the side of the Defendant only when he raises a plea of set off or counter-claim is erroneous.