KRISHNA GINNING FACTORY Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner / plaintiff has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dtd. 20/9/2021 passed by the Additional District Judge, Nagada, District - Ujjain, whereby the application filed under Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been dismissed.

(2.) Facts of the case in short are as under

(3.) Shri Sethi, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the defendants had occasion to file a counterclaim along with the written statement that was filed on 9/10/2018, thereafter, the issues have been framed and the plaintiff has given evidence by way of an affidavit under Order XVIII Rule 4 of the CPC, therefore, now the counterclaim under Order VIII Rule 6-A cannot be taken on record. In support of his contention, learned Senior Counsel placed reliance upon a judgment delivered by the Apex Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Kalra v/s Wing CDR. Surendra Agnihotri & Others reported in (2020) 2 SCC 394, in which it has been held that in any case counterclaim cannot be taken on record after framing the issues.