1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO.598 OF 2008 (KESHAV @ NARENDRA RAMCHANDRA CHAWADE & ANR. Vs SUBHASH VITTHALRAO BHOYAR) _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders ______________________________________________________________________________________________ CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATED : JULY 30, 2008. 1. By this petition, the petitioner, original defendant in Regular Civil Suit No.57 of 2006, takes exception to rejection of his prayer to make counter claim by amendment to the written statement. The written statement itself is stated to have been filed on 31st January, 2007. The application for amendment, whereby the counter claim is sought to be inserted, shows that the cause of action arose on 14-15th July, 2007 i.e. after filing of the written statement. In view of the clear mandate of Order VIII Rule 6-A of the Code counter claim can be entertained only if the cause of action had arisen before or after filing of the suit, but up to the date of filing of the written statement. This position has been clarified by the Apex 2 Court in Shanti Rani Das Dewanjee Vs. Dinesh Chandra Day, reported at 1998(2) Civil LJ 1. A judgment in Bollepanda P. Poonacha Vs. K.M. Madopa, reported at 2008(4) SCALE 141, on which the learned counsel for the respondent placed reliance, also holds that a right to file counter claim is restricted to cause of action which is accrued before the defendant has raised defence. The judgment in Jag Mohan Chawla Vs. Dera Radha Swami Satsang, reported at AIR 1996 SC 2222, on which the learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance, relates to the question of the liberty to the defendant to raise counter claim in respect of the same or even different property. 2. Judgment in Shantirani Vs. Dineshchandra (supra) undoubtedly lays down that the restriction requiring the counter claim to be filed only in respect of cause of action till filing of the written statement does not take away or curtail limitation, i.e. a separate suit can be filed for the cause of action accrued after that date. But it is not an authority for the proposition that merely because the limitation, to file a suit in respect of the cause of action which is accrued after filing of the 3 written statement, has still not expired, the defendant can be entitled to espouse it by way of counter claim. 3. In view of this, no fault can be found with the order passed by the learned trial Judge. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. Interim relief stands vacated. JUDGE RR.