IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.2159 of 2008 RAM CHANDRA SAH & ORS Versus RAM BABU PRASAD & ORS ----------- 2 9/1/2009 Heard counsel for the petitioners. In the opinion of this Court when the Plaintiffs-petitioners themselves were responsible in triggering of the amendment in the plaint which was allowed only on 28.9.1007, they cannot be heard to say that either the defendants-opposite parties should not have filed an additional written statement or a counter claim emanating from the pleadings made for the first time by way of amendment in the plaint. To that extent order of the court below allowing and/or entertaining the additional written statement-cum- counter claim of the defendants-opposite parties, does not suffer from any jurisdictional error. The last submission of counsel for the petitioner, however, must be noted that the court below in the impugned order while allowing the counter claim has not given an opportunity to the plaintiffs- petitioners to file the written statement 2 against the counter claim in terms of sub. section 3 to the proviso of order VIII, rule 6 A of the Code of Civil Procedure. If that be the only grievance of the petitioner, as must be in view of findings recorded above, this Court would direct the petitioner to file his written statement confined to the counter claim allowed by the court below by the impugned order within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the above observations and directions this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Abhay Kumar