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

2011 Supreme(Ker) 999

K.T.SANKARAN
Vidyadharan – Appellant
Versus
Thankamma – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:T.N. Manoj, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner herein filed O.S.No.179 of 2010 on the file of the court of the Munsiff of Irinjalakuda for fixation of boundary of the plaint schedule property. The defendants filed a written statement on 96.2010. Thereafter, the defendants filed I.A.No.4250 of 2010 to amend the written statement and to incorporate a counter claim. The court below allowed the application by Exhibit P5 order dated 21st December 2010, which is under challenge in this Original Petition.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the court below was not justified in allowing the amendment. The defendant did not file the counter claim on the date of filing of the written statement. Therefore, the defendants are precluded from filing a counter claim later. It is pointed out that the cause of action for the counter claim arose on 10. 5.2010.

3. Sub Rule (1) of Rule 6A Order 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure reads as follows :

"6A. Counter-claim by defendant : (1) A defendant in a suit may, in addition to his right of pleading a set-off under Rule 6, set up, by way of counter claim against the claim of the plaintiff, any right or claim in respect of a cause of action accruing to the









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