SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(Kar) 148

SUBHASH B.ADI
R. Vijaya Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Muniyammanni – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:Rajagopala Naidu, Advocate.
For the Respondents: --

Judgment :

1. These writ petitions are directed against the order of I.A.Nos.6 and 7 filed by the petitioner, one under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure code, 1908 and another under Section 151 of the CPC.

2. Petitioner-defendant 2 had sought for amendment of the written statement for incorporating para 13-A. He also filed another application in I.A.No.VII seeking counterclaim against the plaintiffs. Both the applications have been rejected by the Trial Court by the impugned order dated 11th January, 2012, as against which, these writ petitions have been filed.

3. Respondents 1 to 3-plaintiffs have filed a suit in O.S.No.15590 of 2006. In response to the summons, this defendant has filed a written statement on 22-7-2006 and the application for counter-claim was filed on 28-3-2011. The counter-claim could have been filed either before filing the written statement or before a day fixed for filing the written statement as contemplated under Order 8, Rule 6-A of CPC.

4. As far as application I.A.No.VI is concerned, petitioner’s defence in the written statement was that, he had denied the entire claim of the plaintiffs and he had even denied that the first plaintiff has not execu



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top