Hon’ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J.—Heard Shri Anil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the defendant-revisionist.

2. Learned counsel for the defendant-revisionist submits that his application has been rejected by the impugned order dated 10.9.2015 by the Court of Additional District Judge, Court No. 18, Agra on the ground that application for counter claim under the facts and circumstances of the case, is barred by Order 8 Rule 6-A of C.P.C. and the said application was belatedly filed after five years of filing of the written statement. He submits that in view of the law settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Baldev Singh and others v. Manohar Singh and another, 2006 (6) SCC 498 (Paras 8 and 12), the amendment application filed by the defendant-revisionist under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Order 8 Rule 6-A of C.P.C. should have been liberally considered and it should have been allowed. He further submits that Order 8 Rule 6-A of C.P.C. provides for counter-claim to be filed before delivery of defence, has been misinterpreted by the trial Court by observing that the counter-claim should have been filed before filing of the written statement or before framing of th