ZILA PANCHAYAT PARISHAD Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Zila Panchayat Parishad
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE
Click here to view full judgement.
Brahma Singh Verma, J. -
(1.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 28.07.2006, whereby application to reject the counter claim filed in suit No. 53 of 2001, against the defendant No. 1, has been rejected by learned Civil Judge, Haldwani, District Nainital.
(2.) AGGRIEVED by the order dated 28.07.2006, revision No. 26 of 2006, was preferred before Additional District Judge, Haldwani, which was also dismissed vide order dated 10.10.2007. Hence this writ petition. The only short controversy to be decided in the writ petition is that whether the counter claim is maintainable against the defendant?
(3.) FOR the convenience, Order 8 Rule 6 -A of C.P.C., is quoted below: - -
"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 or after the filing of the suit but before the defendant has delivered his defence has expired, whether such counter -claim is in the nature of a claim for damages or not:
Provided that such counter -claim shall not exceed the pecuniary limits of the jurisdiction of the Court.
(2)Such counter -claim shall have the same effect as a cross -suit so as to enable the Court to pronounce a final judgment in the same suit, both on the original claim and on the counter claim.
(3)The plaintiff shall be at liberty to file a written statement in answer to the counter -claim of the defendant within such period as may be fixed by the Court.
(4)The counter -claim shall be treated as a plaint and governed by the rules applicable to the plaints.";
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.