-1- 2025:CGHC:18309 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 367 of 2025 Maheshram Banchor S/o Late Shri Kashiram Banchor Aged About 67 Years R/o Village- Selud, Tahsil - Patan, District- Durg (C.G.). ... Petitioner versus 1 - Ashok Banchor S/o Late Shri Kejuram Banchor, R/o House No. 488, Phase-2, Baloda Bazar Road, Near Dps, Sumit Land, Semariya, District- Raipur, C.G. 2 - Smt. Hemin Bai Banchor W/o Late Shri Kejuram Banchor R/o House No. 210, Ward No. 10, Village- Selud, Tahsil- Patan, District- Durg (C.G.). 3 - Bhagwat Banchor S/o Late Shri Kejuram Banchor R/o Village- Selud, Tahsil - Patan, District- Durg (C.G.). 4 - Narhari Banchor S/o Late Shri Kejuram Banchor R/o Village- Selud, Tahsil- Patan, District- Durg, C.G. 5 - Chunnilal Banchor S/o Late Shri Kejuram Banchor R/o Village- Selud, Tahsil - Patan, District- Durg, C.G. 6 - Smt. Meena Verma W/o Arun Verma D/o Late Shri Kejuram Banchor, R/o Village- Gondgiri, Tehsil- Berla, District - Bemetara, C.G. 7 - Smt. Nandini Verma W/o Surendra Verma D/o Late Shri Kejuram Banchor, R/o Azad Chowk, Patan, Tahsil - Patan, District - Durg (C.G.) 8 - Smt. Hawant Verma W/o Anand Verma D/o Late Shri Kejuram Banchor, R/o Ward No. 24, Arjun Chowk, Raja Talab, Raipur, Tahsil And District- Raipur, C.G. 9 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE -2- For Petitioner : Mr. Rishi Sahu, Advocate, holding the brief of Mr. Jitendra Gupta, Advocate For State : Mr. Lav Sharrma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 23.04.2025 1) The instant writ petition is directed against the order dated 27.03.2025 passed by the Learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Patan, District Durg, C.G. in Civil Suit No. A/49/2023 (Annexure P-1), whereby the learned Trial Court declined to accept the counter-claim filed by the Petitioner (defendant No.1). 2) Brief facts of the case are as under:- A. Respondents/Plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration, permanent injunction, and vacant possession before the Learned Trial Court and it was registered as Civil Suit No.A/49/2023 interalia on the ground that the lands situated at Village Selud, P.H. No.27, Tahsil Patan, District Durg belonged to their father Late Shri Kejuram Banchor, who expired on 10.04.2018. After the death of Late Banchor, the names of the plaintiffs were entered in the revenue records. B. The plaintiffs further pleaded that when they made an application for demarcation on 02.12.2022, they came to know through revenue record that defendant No.1 (Petitioner) is in possession of land bearing Survey No.467, admeasuring 0.48 hectare, situated at village Selud. Accordingly, the suit for declaration, permanent injunction, and vacant possession was filed. Defendant No.1 -3- (Petitioner herein) filed a counter-claim seeking a declaration of title and permanent injunction. C. The Learned Trial Court, vide order dated 27.03.2025 declined to accept the counter-claim on the ground that since the relief sought in the counter-claim is identical to the relief sought by the plaintiffs and the reliefs were sought by the plaintiffs by filing the suit much prior to the filing of counter claim, therefore the counter-claim is not maintainable however defendant No. 1 may prefer a separate civil suit. 3) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the impugned order is bad in law. He would further submit that the counter-claim should have been treated as a cross-suit and the rejection of the counter-claim would lead to multiplicity of proceedings; thus, he would pray that the instant writ petition may be allowed. 4) On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and support the order passed by the Learned Trial Court. 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on the file. 6) It appears from the documents that issues were framed in the suit on 02.11.2023 and the counter-claim was filed by defendant No.1 on 30.04.2024 i.e. after the framing of issues. 7) At this juncture, it would be advantageous to refer to the judgment of the -4- Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the matter of Ashok Kumar Kalra v. Wing Commander Surendra Agnihotri and Others, reported in (2020) 2 SCC 394, wherein it is held that “A counter-claim can be filed only before the framing of issues in the suit. Filing of counter-claim after the issues have been framed is not maintainable.” 8) In the present case, the counter-claim was filed by defendant No.1 on 30.04.2024, whereas, the issues were framed on 02.11.2023. 9) Taking into consideration the fact that the counter-claim was filed after the framing of issues and the petitioner has sought almost similar relief claimed by the plaintiffs, therefore, in my opinion, no case is made out warranting interference with the order impugned. 10) Consequently, this writ petition is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nadim