G PULLAIAH Vs. P VIJAYKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision Petitioner is the Plaintiff in O.S. No. 232 of 2005 on the file of the Court of the I-Addl. District Judge, R.R. District at L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad. This Civil Revision Petition is preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the dismissal of I.A. No. 2161 of 2010 filed by the Plaintiff under Order 8 Rule 6C of Code of Civil Procedure with a prayer to exclude the counter claim raised by the Defendant No. 2 in her written statement.

(2.) The facts, in brief, are as under:

(3.) Having regard to the plea taken by the Defendant No. 1 that a Registered Sale Deed was executed in favour of one B.V. Dhanalakshmi in respect of the suit schedule property, the Plaintiff got impleaded the said B.V. Dhanalakshmi as Defendant No. 2. Thereafter the Defendant No. 2 filed a written statement with counter claim under Order 8 Rule 6A of Code of Civil Procedure seeking delivery of vacant and peaceful possession of the suit schedule property to her and to direct the Plaintiff to pay damages at the rate of Rs. 20,000/-per month apart from arrears of Rs. 7,20,000/-. It was claimed by the 2nd Defendant that the 1st Defendant had executed an Agreement of Sale in favour of the General Power of Attorney-holder long back on 20.05.2001 and in pursuance thereof substantial amounts were paid to the Defendant No. 1 by the said General Power of Attorney-holder as well as the Defendant No. 2 and ultimately the Registered Sale Deed, dated 13.10.2006 was executed in favour of the 2nd Defendant and the possession of the suit schedule property was delivered to her. It was alleged that subsequently the possession of the suit schedule property was taken by the Plaintiff unlawfully and therefore the continuation of the Plaintiff in possession of the said property was illegal and the Plaintiff was liable to pay the damages as well as mesne profits of Rs. 7,20,000/-from 1.10.2007 apart from handing over the vacant possession of the suit schedule property to the 2nd Defendant. Thus the counter claim was made under Order 8 Rule 6-A of Code of Civil Procedure for the above said reliefs.