ARVIND KUMAR GUPTA Vs. ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners.

(2.) NO one appeared on behalf of contesting respondent no.3, even though the case was taken up in revised list. Petitioners are plaintiffs in O.S. no.77 of 1996. Relief claimed in the suit is for permanent prohibitory injunction seeking to restrain the defendant respondent no.3 from interfering in the possession of the plaintiffs petitioners over the shop in dispute. Defendant filed written statement on 23.9.2003 thereafter he filed application on 22.5.2006 seeking amendment in the written statement and incorporating counter claim therein. It was stated that on 14.4.2006 plaintiffs forcibly evicted the defendant. In the written statement it was stated that defendant was in possession of the shop in dispute since 1.1.1978 and had matured his title after 12 years therefrom. In the application for amendment of written statement/counter claim prayer for restoration of possession was made. The trial court/civil judge(J.D.) West Hardoi through order dated 9.4.2007 allowed the amendment in the written statement/counter claim. Against the said order plaintiffs petitioners filed Civil Revision no.59 of 2007 which was dismissed by A.D.J. Court no.1 Hardoi on 1.8.2009 hence this writ petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the plaintiffs petitioners has argued that in view of Order VIII Rule 6 -A C.P.C. as inserted w.e.f. 1.2.1977 counter claim may be filed in respect of cause of action which accrued to the defendant before filing of written statement. Order 8 Rule 6 -A(1) is quoted below: