IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 275 of 2008 Date of Decision: February 1, 2010 Raj Karan Singh. …Petitioner Versus Jaswinder Kaur. …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present: Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. I.S. Brar, Advocate, for the respondent. S.D. Anand, J. A plea filed by the defendant-petitioner to obtain the leave of the Court to lodge a counter claim was declined by the learned Trial Court by observing that it was too late in the day for the defendant-petitioner to come up with the counter claim, particularly when the suit had been filed in the year 2004. It was noticed in the impugned order itself that the written statement in the matter was filed in the year 2004 itself. The evidence of the plaintiff-respondent came to be closed on 08.06.2006. Instead of adducing evidence, the C.R. No. 275 of 2008 petitioner-defendant resorted to an exercise of delay by filing one application or the other. It was noticed, in that context, that he had earlier filed a plea for the recall of the witnesses (examined by the plaintiff-respondent) for further cross- examination. The learned Trial Court further found that the counter claim, if allowed to be filed, “will change the entire defence of the defendant and will change the nature of defence taken by him.” The learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner is not in a position to argue that there is any factual inaccuracy in the observations made by the learned Trial Court. For the reasons noticed by the learned Trial Judge, the petition is held to be devoid of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. February 1, 2010 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 2