CRP 346/2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. S.P. Roy, the learned counsel for the petition er. The petitioner, who is the plaintiff in Title Suit No.23 8/2009 has filed the present application challenging the orders dated 06-08-2009 ; 19-08-2009; 02-09-2009 and 16-09-2009 passed by the learned Munsiff No.2, Kamr up at Guwahati. The said orders are quoted below:- 06-08-09 Def side filed hazira. Plaintiff side vide pt No.1349/09 sought time to file w.s. The prayer is allowe d. Also seen and perused the pt No.1348/09 filed by the plaintiff U/o-VIII R-6- C for exclusion of the counter-claim. 19-08-09 Both sides vide pt No.1507/09 and 1508/09 sought time which are allowed. Fix 02-09-09 for w.s. against the counter-claim and obj. if any on pt. No.1348/0 9. 02-09-09 Def side filed hazira. Plaintiff side vide pt No.1698/09 sought time to file w.s. against the counter-c laim. The prayer is allowed. The def side has received copy. Fix 16-09-09 for w.s. against counter-claim and obj. on pt. No.1349/09. 16-09-09 Def side has filed objection. Plaintiff side vide pt No.1875/09 sought time to file w.s. on the ground stated in the petition which is allowed. Fix 23-09-09 for w.s. against counter-claim & obj hearing. The present petitioner, who instituted the said suit as plaintiff filed an application under Order 8 Rule 6-C of the CPC on 06-08-2009 p raying for exclusion of the counter claim filed by the defendant No.1 alongwith the written statement filed. Apart from filing such applications, a separate ap plication being Petition No.1349/2009 has been filed by the present petitioner s eeking time to file the written statement against the counter claim filed by the defendant No.1. The learned Trial Court upon consideration of such application seeking adjournment has granted time till 19-08-2009 for filing written stateme nt against the counter claim and also fixed for filing objection against the pet ition No.1348/2009 filed under Order 8 Rule 6-C of the CPC for exclusion of the counter claim. On 19-08-2009, another application has been filed by the present petitioner seeking further time to file written statement against the counter c laim. The application has also been filed by the defendant for filing objection against the application filed under Order 8 Rule 6-C of the CPC. The learned C ourt has therefore, allowed time for filing the written statement, against the c ounter claim, by the present petitioner and also for objection against the petit ion under Order 8 Rule 6-C of the CPC by the defendant No.1. On 02-09-2009, the present petitioner again filed an application seeking further time to file writ ten statement against the counter claim. Such prayer has been allowed fixing 16 -09-2009. The learned Court below has also fixed the said application under Ord er 8 Rule 6-C of the CPC on 16-09-2009 for filing objection by the defendant. Th e same thing has repeated on 16-09-2009. The learned Court below again on the p rayer made by the present petitioner seeking time to file written statement agai nst the counter claim, allowed the same fixing 23-09-2009 for filing the written statement against the counter claim and also for hearing objection on the petit ion filed under Order 8 Rule 6-C of the CPC. The grievance of the petitioner in the present petition is that since he has filed the application under Order 8 Rule 6-C of the CPC for exclusion of the counter claim, the learned Court below ought to have first con sidered the said application before fixing any date for filing the written state ment. The petitioner has sought to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. From the facts, as narrated above, it appears that it is the petitioner, who has time and again filed applications seeking time to file written statement against the counter claim. Such applications having been filed , the learned Court below has to consider such applications and pass order. The learned Court below has on the basis of the prayer of the petitioner allowed tim e to file the written statement by the present petitioner against the counter cl aim. The present petitioner has not prayed before the learned Court below to the effect that unless the application filed under Order 8 Rule 6-C of the CPC is d isposed of, no date for filing the written statement can be fixed. In view of the above, I do not find any ground to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India a nd hence, the present petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.2,500/- to be deposi ted by the petitioner before the High Court Legal Aid Committee within 2 (two) w eeks from today.