0508wp3752.11.odt 1 THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.3752 of 2011. M/s JSR Constructions Pvt. Ltd. ..vs.. Vithoba Radobaji Mankar and ors. ............................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ............................................................................................................................................................... Mr. M.P.Rajkondawar , Adv. for the petitioner. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : 5th August, 2011. 1. The above petition takes exception to the order dated 2/7/2011 passed by the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Wardha, by which order the application for amendment of the written statement filed by the defendants came to be allowed and resultantly, the defendants were allowed to file their counter claim in the said suit. 2. In so far as the defendant nos.5 and 6 are concerned, the Trial Court had earlier passed an order of proceeding ex parte against the said defendants. The said defendants had filed an application for setting aside the said order which was allowed by the Trial Court. The said defendants thereafter filed their written statement by adopting the written statement filed by the respondent nos.1 to 3. It appears that in view of the subsequent developments which had occurred after filing of the written statement by the defendants nos.1 to 3 that a joint application by all the defendants came to be filed for amendment of the written statement so as to incorporate the 0508wp3752.11.odt 2 counter claim seeking declaration in respect of the alleged illegal possession of the plaintiffs, which, according to the defendants, was taken by the plaintiffs on 15/6/2005. 3. The Trial Court considered the said application filed by the defendants and by placing reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court reported in AIR 2003 SC 2508 in the matter of Ramesh Chand ..vs.. Anil Panjwani wherein the Apex court has held that the purpose of the provision enabling filing of a counter-claim is to avoid multiplicity of judicial proceedings and save upon the Court’s time as also to exclude the inconvenience to the parties by enabling claims and counter claims, that is, all disputes between the same parties being decided in the course of the same proceedings. The Trial Court thereafter has recorded that the defendants have demonstrated that in spite of due diligence they could not have filed the amendment application earlier. In my view, the reasons mentioned by the Trial Court in exercise of discretion while allowing the amendment cannot be faulted with. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court reported in AIR 2008 SC 2003 in the matter of Bollepanda P.Poonacha and anr. ..vs.. K.M.Madapa. The facts in the said case, in my view, are distinguishable from the facts of the present case and therefore, the said judgment would have no application. In that view of the matter, no case for interference is made out. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE chute 0508wp3752.11.odt 3