MAHESH GOVINDJI TRIVEDI versus BAKUL MAGANLAL VYAS & ORS.

MAHESH GOVINDJI TRIVEDI versus BAKUL MAGANLAL VYAS & ORS.

The Division Bench's order setting aside the Single Judge's grant of leave to place the counter-claim on record was unsustainable; the counter-claim was filed on 07.09.2018 before issues were framed and the Single Judge's order dated 02.05.2019 permitting the counter-claim to avoid multiplicity of proceedings (while keeping plaintiffs' defences including limitation open) was proper and is restored; the Supreme Court's order dated 26.02.2021 treating the counter-claim on record as a fait accompli and directing expeditious proceedings further supported not re-opening the question.

Parties
Defendant/appellant: Mahesh Govindji Trivedi; Plaintiff/respondent: Bakul Maganlal Vyas & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Division Bench Order; Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Counter Claim, Leave to File Counter Claim, Order VIII Rule 6 a CPC, Rule 95 Bombay High Court (original Side) Rules, Framing of Issues, Expeditious Disposal
Civil Procedure Property Specific Performance Counter Claim Leave to File Counter Claim Order VIII Rule 6 a CPC Rule 95 Bombay High Court (original Side) Rules Framing of Issues +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mahesh Govindji Trivedi

Defendant/appellant

Bakul Maganlal Vyas & Ors.

Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Division Bench Order; Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Division Bench was justified in setting aside the Single Judge's order allowing a belated counter-claim
  2. 2 Whether a counter-claim filed after the written statement but before framing of issues can be permitted under Order VIII Rule 6-A CPC and Rule 95
  3. 3 What is the impact of this Court's order dated 26.02.2021 on the permissibility of the counter-claim and the continuing pleadings

Ratio Decidendi

The Division Bench's order setting aside the Single Judge's grant of leave to place the counter-claim on record was unsustainable; the counter-claim was filed on 07.09.2018 before issues were framed and the Single Judge's order dated 02.05.2019 permitting the counter-claim to avoid multiplicity of proceedings (while keeping plaintiffs' defences including limitation open) was proper and is restored; the Supreme Court's order dated 26.02.2021 treating the counter-claim on record as a fait accompli and directing expeditious proceedings further supported not re-opening the question.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned Division Bench order dated 30.11.2021 set aside
  • Order dated 02.05.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge restored