Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.27 seconds)Modula India vs Kamakshya Singh Deo on 27 September, 1988
13. In the light of the material on record, it is clear that the defence of the defendant/ Revision petitioner was struck-off in I.A.No. 2936 of 2002. Admittedly, the said order has become final. However, as rightly contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the counter-claim made by the defendant under Order 8 Rule 6-A of C.P.C. is nothing but a counter-suit and therefore the same would undoubtedly survive irrespective of the fact that the defence of the defendant was struck-off. That apart, as held by the Apex Court in Modula Indira v. Kamakshya Singh Deo, law is well settled that even after striking-off of the defence, the defendant is still entitled to cross-examine the witnesses of the plaintiff and address arguments on the basis of the plaintiff's case. There is nothing in law to preclude him from demonstrating to the Court that the plaintiff's witnesses are not speaking the truth or that the evidence put forward by the plaintiff is not sufficient to fulfill the terms of the statute.
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 151 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
1