C.R.No.4016 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. C.R.No.4016 of 2010 Date of decision: 30.8.2010 Bakhshish Singh ...Petitioner vs Charan Singh and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr. Naresh Kaushal Advocate, for the petitioners. None for the respondents. Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral) This is plaintiff's revision petition challenging the impugned order dated 27.2.2010 whereby the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kharar, at the fag end of the case, i.e. when the case was listed for orders, allowed an application filed by the defendant-respondents for amendment of their counter claim under Order 6 rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Notice of motion was issued to the respondents. As per office report, service is complete but no one is present on behalf of the respondents to assist this Court. Challenging the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted before this Court that the parties to the lis had concluded their evidence and on 17.11.2009, the arguments by both the counsel representing the parties were heard and thereafter the trial Court had fixed the case for pronouncement of the orders on 28.11.2009, 3.12.2009 and 9.12.2009 and there was absolutely no occasion to entertain the present application for amendment at that stage and, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. C.R.No.4016 of 2010 2 Admittedly the counter claim is just like a plaint and is to be tried like civil suit and once the maintainability and validity of the same has been countered by the plaintiff while controverting each and every assertion and while raising the preliminary objections with regard to the same having not been filed in accordance with law, there was absolutely no occasion to maintain the application for amendment, that too for filling up the lacuna and making the objections raised by the plaintiff redundant especially after the evidence was already concluded and the case was fixed for pronouncement of orders. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned order is set aside and the revision petition is allowed ( Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 30, 2010 rk