ORDER :

(The matter is heard through “Video Conferencing/Hybrid Mode”.) Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decretal order dated 08.06.2015 made in I.A.No.268 of 2015 in O.S.No.98 of 2012 on the file of the III Additional District Court, Pondicherry.

2. The petitioner is 5th defendant, the respondents 1 to 3 are defendants 1, 2 and 4, 4th respondent is plaintiff and 5th respondent is 3rd defendant in O.S.No.98 of 2012 on the file of III Additional District Court, Pondicherry. The 4th respondent filed the said suit against the petitioner, respondents 1 to 3 and 5th respondent for partition, declaration and other relief. The 1st respondent filed written statement and the same was adopted by the petitioner, respondents 2 and 3. Thereafter, the respondents 1 to 3 and petitioner filed I.A.No.268 of 2015 under Order VIII Rule 6-A, 8 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. for permission to file additional written statement and counter-claim.

3. According to the petitioner and respondents 1 to 3, the 4th respondent filed the suit for partition and other relief including relief to set aside the sale deed dated 29.04.2009 executed by the 1st respondent in favour of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the suit property is individual property of the 1st respondent. The petitioner purchased item No.3 of the suit property for valuable sale consideration and the 1st respondent has given the sale proceeds to all her children including 4th respondent. Considering the pitiable condition of the 4th respondent, the petitioner permitted the 4th respondent to occupy a portion of Item No.3 of the property till her children are settled. The son and daughter of 4th respondent got employment and the 4th respondent acted against the interest of the petitioner. Hence she withdrew the permission given to the 4th respondent. Those facts were not made in the written statement filed by her mother, the 1st respondent herein. Hence, it is necessary to file additional written statement and counter-claim.

4. The respondents 4 and 5 did not file any counter affidavit.

5. The learned Judge dismissed the I.A. holding that written statement was filed on 02.07.2013, the present petition is filed on 12.03.2015 without any additional written statement and counter-claim, only to drag on the proceedings.

6. Against the said fair and decretal order dated 08.06.2015 made in I.A.No.268 of 2015 in O.S.No.98 of 2012, the petitioner has come out with the present Civil Revision Petition.

7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the learned Judge failed to consider that only after leave being granted, a counter-claim can be filed. The 4th respondent did not file counter affidavit in the I.A. filed by the petitioner. The petitioner permitted the 4th respondent to occupy the portion of the suit property only due to her pitiable condition. The reason given by the learned Judge that the present petition is filed only to drag on the proceedings is erroneous. On the other hand, if the petition is not allowed, the petitioner cannot defend the case effectively.

8. The 1st respondent died. Though notice has been served on the respondents 2 to 5 and their names are printed in the cause list, there is no representation for them either in person or through counsel.

9. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the entire materials available on record. 10. From the materials on record, it is seen that the present I.A. is filed for permission to file additional written statement and counterclaim. The defendants have right to file counter claim as per Order VIII Rule 6-A of C.P.C. The said Rule reads as follows:

Order VIII Rule 6-A:

“6-A. 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 defendant against the plaintiff either before o