1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

WRIT PETITION NO.15190 OF 2020(GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

M/S JSW STEEL LIMITED

A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER

THE COMPANIES ACT AND

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT

JINDAL MANSION, 5A,

DR G DESHMUKH MARG,

MUMBAI-400026.

AND ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT U-607,

6^TH FLOOR, EAST WING,

RAHEJA TOWERS, M G ROAD,

BANGALORE-560001.

REPRESENTED BY ITS

AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE,

SRI MANI MANUEL.

... PETITIONER

(BY SRI. K G RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE A/W

SMT. ANURADHA S R, ADVOCATE))

AND:

MYSORE MINERALS LIMITED

A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER

THE COMPANIES ACT AND

HAVING ITS REGISTERED

OFFICE AT NO.39, M G ROAD,

BANGALORE-560001.

REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. SRINIVAS RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE FOR

SRI. LOMESH KIRAN, ADVOCATE FOR C/R)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR

RECORDS IN O.S.NO.7213/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL

JUDGE, BENGALURU AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED

R

2

10.11.2020 PASSED ON I.A.NO.4 IN O.S.NO.7213/2012

ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED

FOR ORDER, THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE

FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

Petitioner being the plaintiff in a money suit in

Com.O.S.No.7213/2012 is at the door steps of the Writ

Court for assailing the order dated 10.11.2020 a copy

whereof is at Annexure-A whereby the learned LXXXII

Addl.

City

Civil

Judge,

Bengaluru,

having

allowed

respondent-defendant’s application in I.A.No.IV filed u/o

VI Rule 17 r/w Sec. 151 of CPC, 1908 has accorded leave

to amend the Written Statement for incorporating a

Counterclaim therein; the respondent having entered

caveat through it’s counsel, opposes the Writ Petition.

2.

Material Facts:

Petitioner

company

filed

the

subject

suit

on

5.10.2012

for

a

money

decree

in

a

sum

of

Rs.270,11,91,123/-; respondent-company resisted the suit

by filing the Written Statement on 17.04.2013; long

thereafter i.e., on 29.07.2016, it filed the Application in

I.A.No.IV u/o VI Rule 17 r/w section 151 of CPC, 1908

seeking leave to introduce the Counterclaim in the Written

3

Statement by way of amendment; the Counterclaim by way

of damages is in a sum of Rs.1172.79 crores, with interest

at the rate of 18% per annum; apparently, it is founded on

the fact matrix which is substantially anterior to the

institution of the suit; this was objected to by the

petitioner inter alia on the ground of bar of limitation and

delay & latches; however, court below sanctioned the

amendment, which is now put in challenge, in this

petition.

3.

Contentions of the parties:

(a) The pith & substance of petitioner’s challenge is

that: a Counterclaim cannot be made by way of

amendment of Written Statement after the expiry of

statutory period of limitation; a counterclaim is nothing

but a ‘deemed suit’ for all practical purposes and therefore

is bound by the same limitation period which a money suit

is; apparently, suit, if were to be filed on the cause of

action on which the respondent’s Counterclaim is founded,

it would have failed because of the expiry of limitation

period; petitioner’s counsel banks upon certain decisions

in support of this stand.

4

(b) Respondent, per contra, contends in justification

of the impugned order and the reasons on which it is

structured; essentially respondent presses into service

three factors viz., (i) ‘doctrine of relation back’ whereby

amendments become retrospective in effect from the date

of filing of the pleadings concerned; (ii) unassailability of

the discretionary order granting leave to amend the

Written Statement, & (iii) the foundational facts supporting

the Counterclaim being already pleaded in the Written

Statement; it’s counsel