{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6538 OF 2008 Jaisingh Dhansingh Pardeshi Deceased through LRs PETITIONERS VERSUS Bhujangrao Ramkrishna Chinchole R/o Kandari, Tq & Dist-Jalgaon RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.P.P.Dhorde, Advocate for the petitioners Mr.A.M.Gholap, Advocate for respondent ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE : 15 th June 2009 PER COURT: 1. By the present petition, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, who are legal heirs of original defendant, have challenged the order dated 15.07.2008 passed below Exhibit-74 in Special Civil Suit No.396/1994, by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon. The respondent, original plaintiff, has filed a suit for specific performance against deceased Jaisingh Pardeshi. After service of summons, said Jaisingh Pardeshi appeared in the said suit and contested the same by filing {2} written statement at Exhibit-15. During the pendency of the said suit, original defendant expired and the petitioners are brought on record as his legal heirs. The petitioners have filed additional written statement cum counter claim on 17.02.2007. It appears that the respondent / original plaintiff has filed his objection Exhibit-79, to the counter claim, however he did not object to allow the additional written statement of the petitioners. Vide order dated 15.07.2008, learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon, partly allowed the said application by allowing the additional written statement, however refused to allow the counter claim, and the same order is under challenge in this petition. Read Order 8 Rule 6 (A) with Order 22 Rule 4 sub Rule (2) of the Civil Procedure Code. By combine reading of these two rules, the legal position is very clear that after the demise of the original defendant, his heirs are entitle to file additional pleadings under Order 22 Rule 4 of Civil Procedure code. However, at the same time, they are precluded from raising any contradictory claim than the defense put up by the original defendant in whose shoes they have stepped in. This fact is made clear in Order 22 Rule 4 of Civil Procedure Code at the same time as per Sub Rule 6 (A) of Order 8, the defendant is always entitled to file counter claim, if arises from same cause of action, at the time of filing of his defense or during the time permitted to file his defense by way of written statement in the special suit. However, the original defendant has filed only written statement and not the counter claim. Thus, the fact is very clear that when no counter claim is filed by the original defendant {3} along with his written statement, then after his demise, though his heirs are allowed to file additional written statement, yet are precluded from filing counter claim. In view of this legal position, I do not find any fault with the order passed by the learned trial court, which requires any interference. The writ petition, which is sans merits, is dismissed in limine with no order as to costs. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/wp6538-08