BANK OF BARODA Vs. GURCHARAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the plaintiff (respondent in the first Appellate Court) against the order of the District Judge, Gurgaon, dated 25th Jan. 1985, allowing the defendant (appellant in the first Appellate Court) to amend the written statement and to make a counter claim under O.8 R.6-A, Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) Briefly, the facts are that the plaintiff instituted a suit for recovery of Rs.54,273/-against the defendant, which was contested by it. Ultimately, the trial Court decreed the suit on 19th Feb., 1982. The defendant went up in appeal before the District Judge, Gurgaon. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant made an application under O.6 R.17 of the Code seeking amendment of the written statement. It was sought to be pleaded that the goods pledged by him were rusted while they were in custody of the Bank on account of its negligence. He, therefore, prayed that he be allowed to claim damages from the Bank by way of counter-claim. It was alleged that the fact came to his knowledge when Mr.M.L. Chopra P.W. 4 and Mr. J. P. Aggarwal P.W.7, Managers of the Bank, made statements in the Court. The application was allowed by the first Appellate Court. Consequently, it accepted the appeal, set aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court and remanded the case for de novo trial, after allowing the defendant to amend the written statement. The Bank has come up in revision to this Court.

(3.) Mr. Shahpuri, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the defendant-respondent could not be allowed to set up counter claim under R.6-A of O.8 by amending the written statement as the counter claim could be set up prior to the submission of the written statement and not subsequent thereto.