PEERU Vs. HAPPO BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH consent of learned counsel for the parties the petition is heard finally. This petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India at the instance of defendant, is directed against order dated 27.02.2012 passed in civil suit No. 23 -A/2011 by First Civil Judge, Class -II, Khandwa; whereby, application preferred by the petitioners -defendants No. 1 and 2 under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Order 8 Rule 6A(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking amendment and to put counter claim has been rejected.

(2.) SUIT at the instance of respondent No. 1/plaintiff is for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of property which find mention in Annexure -A appended with suit plaint on the ground that the same has been gifted in favour of plaintiff by her mother -Munna Bai vide Will dated 13.10.1988.

(3.) TRIAL Court vide impugned order rejected the application under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC on the ground that the suit having been fixed for plaintiff's evidence and there being no explanation regarding due diligence. Whereas, an application under Order 8 Rule 6A(1) of CPC for counter claim has been rejected on the ground that, if allowed, the same will exceed pecuniary jurisdiction of the trial Court.