GANU KISNA BURADKAR Vs. MANIK KISNA BURADKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE, returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, matter is taken up for hearing.

(2.) THE petitioner, who is a plaintiff, has initiated a suit for declaration and injunction against the present respondents-defendants claiming a decree for declaration, that the plaintiff is the owner of the field in question. The respondents-defendants appeared and filed their written statement on 23/02/1995. However, having realised that some important and material defence remained to be taken in the written statement and since the counter claim through the written statement was already made, the respondents moved an application on 5/10/2001 for amendment in the counter claim. This application for amendment of the counter claim is for the purpose of inclusion of certain property in the claim, containing that the property purchased on December 30, 199 2/03/1989 and 10/04/1989 though appeared to have been purchased by the petitioner in the name of his sons, necessarily was required to be mentioned in the counter claim was tried to be amended through this application. Without going to the details of the property which is sought to be included in the counter claim, the present petition can be decided particularly when the question raised before this Court is as to whether the learned Judge of the trial Court was justified and right in allowing the amendment to the counter claim.

(3.) TO decide the point in question, it would be appropriate to refer to the provisions of Order VIII, Rule 6-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. This Rule reads as under :