1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10498 OF 2009 Sanmukhrao Krishnarai Kadam ...Petitioner vs. Malti Yeshwant Jadhav ...Respondent Mr.T.D.Deshmukh for the petitioner CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : JANUARY 4, 2010 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is the only defendant. In a suit filed in the year 1989, the petitioner filed the written statement in February 1992. Issues were settled on 15 th July 1994. An application was made by the petitioner in September 2007 at Exh.219 which has been rejected by the trial court by the impugned order. By the said application the petitioner contended that along with the said application the petitioner was filing his counter claim along with the court fee thereon. It is contended that the said counter-claim was as per the counter-claim made in the written statement in the year 1992. Thus, a prayer was made by the petitioner in the year 2007 seeking permission to file the counter claim when his written statement is filed in the year 1992. The said prayer has been rejected by the impugned order. 2 The suit is of the year 1989. This is not a case where in exercise of power of superintendence, this Court can interfere at this stage. If the decree passed by the trial court be adverse to the petitioner, while challenging the decree, the petitioner can always 2 challenge the impugned order. Nothing prevents the petitioner from filing a separate suit subject to law of limitation. 3 Subject to what is observed above, writ petition is rejected. JUDGE