G C SURI Vs. CAPTAIN N R ABBOT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) This petition challenges the order dated 7.2.2006, passed by the revisional court and order dated 31.3.2005, passed by the trial court whereby the amendment application moved under Order VI, Rule 17, C.P.C. has been partly allowed and partly rejected.

(3.) The learned Counsel contends that in a suit for recovery of arrears of rent, the respondent-plaintiff pleaded that the premises have been vacated by the petitioner and in the written statement filed by the petitioner, it has been pleaded that he has been evicted from the premises by force. This written statement was filed on 18.8.1999 and after five years of such filing of written statement the petitioner moved an application praying for amendment, setting up his counter-claim for restitution of the possession. The learned Counsel has, thus, tried to emphasize that such counter-claim should be permitted to be incorporated in the written statement and the courts below have illegally rejected it.