Back
J. SREENIVAS RAO
Yelaboina Kumar, S/o Komuraiah – Appellant
Versus
Guvva Jai Hind, S/o Venkataiah – Respondent
ORDER:
This Civil Revision Petition is filed invoking the provisions of Article 227 of Constitution of India. Aggrieved by the orders dated 04.10.2023 passed by Principle Junior Civil Judge, Jangaon in I.A.No.783 of 2022 in O.S.No.515 of 2021, granting leave to defendant No.1 for filing counter claim in the suit.
2. The revision petitioners are plaintiffs and respondent No.1 is the defendant No.1 in the Suit O.S.No.515 of 2021. For the sake of convenience the parties herein are referred to as they arrayed in the suit before the Court below.
3. Brief Facts of the case:
3.1 Plaintiff filed suit in O.S.No.515 of 2021 on the file of Principle Junior Civil Judge at Jangaon seeking perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the suit schedule property i.e., an extent of Acs.7.36 guntas in Survey No.195/2, 196/2, 195/1/2 and in Survey No.196/1/2, situated at Kanchanapally Revenue Village, Raghunathpally Mandal, Jangaon District. Plaintiffs in the said suit stated that they are the owners and possessors of Scheduled property and the same was purchased from defendant No.2 under Sada Sale deed dated 02.04.1992. Pursuant to the same, their names were mutated in the reven
The court affirmed that counter claims can be filed to prevent multiplicity of proceedings, even after the written statement, as long as they comply with legal principles.
The court has the discretion to entertain filing of the counter claim after the written statement, but such filing should not be done at a highly belated stage. The court should consider various fact....
A counter claim can be treated as a plaint and maintained independently, but must not exceed the court's pecuniary jurisdiction.
A counter-claim cannot be permitted after the framing of issues unless exceptional circumstances exist, which were not present in this case.
The validity of unregistered agreements and the maintainability of suits for perpetual injunction based on possession were central to the judgment.
Judicial authorities must provide reasons for granting temporary injunctions, ensuring adherence to legal standards for prima facie possession and balance of convenience.
A counterclaim directed solely against a co-defendant is typically impermissible; however, if it intertwines with a plaintiff's claim, it may hold validity under commercial agreements.
The court discussed the provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure and its implications on the grant of temporary injunction.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
