Brijesh Kumar, J. - (1.) THIS is a civil revision filed by the plaintiff in Regular Suit No. 11 of 1985, pending in the court of 1st Additional District Judge, Hardoi, against the order passed by the trial court, allowing the defendant -opposite parties No. 3 and 4 to plead counter -claim in their written statement and rejecting the objections raised by the plaintiff against the same. The plaintiff -revisionist filed a suit praying for relief of permanent injunction and for specific performance of an agreement under which it is said that opposite Party No. 3 Shanti Swaroop Singh had agreed to sell the houses in question to the plaintiff for an amount of Rs. 48,500/ -. It appears that the plaintiff -revisionist amended the plaint and added Smt. Omwati Gupta and Smt. Kamlesh Rani Gupta as defendants Nos. 3 and 4 to the suit. The aforesaid defendants Nos. 3 and 4 filed a joint written statement with the averments that they had purchased the property in question by means of a registered sale deed for valuable consideration and by way of counter claim, they prayed for the relief of possession of the houses by eviction of the plaintiff -revisionists. As stated earlier, the plaintiff -revisionist raised objection to the making of counter -claim by the defendants Nos. 3 and 4, which was overruled by the court below.
(2.) THE only point urged by the revisionist before me is that a counterclaim is permissible only in suits for recovery of money under Order VIII, Rule 6 C.P.C. It has been submitted that in no other case of any nature, counter claim is permissible. In support of his contention, the revisionist has placed reliance upon sub -rule (1) of Rule 6 of Order VIII, C.P.C. which reads as follows: - - (1) Where in a suit for the recovery of money the defendant claims to set -off against the plaintiff's demand any ascertained sum of money legally recoverable by him from the plaintiff, not exceeding the pecuniary limits of the jurisdiction of the Court and both parties fill the same character as they fill in the plaintiff's suit, the defendant may, at the first hearing of the suit, but not afterwards unless permitted by the Court, present a written statement containing the particulars of the debt sought to be set -off. Against the submission made on behalf of the revisionist, the learned counsel for the opposite parties has submitted that counter -claim in any suit, not necessarily in a suit for recovery of money alone, is permissible under Order VIII, Rule 6 -A C.P.C. Rule 6 -A of Order VIII C.P.C. reads as follows: - - 6 -A. (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 had delivered his defence or before the time limited for delivering his defence has expired whether such counter -claim is in the nature of a claim for damage, or not: Provided that such counter claim shall not exceed the pecuniary limits of jurisdiction of the court. (2) Such counterclaim 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 counterclaim. (3) The plaintiff shall be at liberty to file a written statement in answer to the counterclaim of the defendant within such period as may be fixed by the court. (4) The counterclaim shall be treated as a plaint and governed by the rules applicable to plaints.
(3.) A perusal of Rule 6 of Order VIII C.P.C. leaves no room for doubt that a set -off can be claimed only in respect of a suit for recovery of money as the nature of suit has been specified in Rule 6. However, so far Rule 6 -A of Order VIII C.P.C. is concerned, nature of suit has not been specified therein. In this connection, the learned counsel for the revisionist has placed reliance upon Rule 6 -F of order VIII C.P.C. which reads as follows: - - 6 -F. Where in any suit a set -off or counterclaim is established as a defence against the plaintiff's claim and any balance is found due to the defendant as the case may be, the court may give judgment to the party entitled to such balance.;