Counter-claim by amendment may be allowed before issues if it rests on the same facts and causes no material prejudice.

A counter-claim may be introduced by amendment to a written statement before framing of issues where it arises from the same factual matrix already pleaded and does not set up a new case. Order VIII Rule 6A CPC was treated as not creating an absolute outer time bar; the relevant constraint is that the cause of action must have accrued before the defence is delivered or the time for defence expires. The commercial procedure timeline did not bar the request because the written statement had been filed with leave within the outer period and issues had not yet been framed. The amendment was therefore permitted, subject to consequential filing and service directions.

---

---

Issues: Whether an amendment to the written statement incorporating a counter-claim could be allowed after the written statement had already been filed and before framing of issues, and whether such amendment was barred by limitation or by the commercial procedural timeline.

Analysis: The counter-claim was held to be founded on facts already pleaded in the written statement, supported by the same transaction and the Chartered Accountant's report, and no new case was introduced. Order VIII Rule 6A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was treated as not prescribing an express outer time limit for filing a counter-claim, the principal constraint being that the cause of action must have accrued before the defence is delivered or before the time for delivering defence expires. The Court also relied on the principle that a counter-claim may be entertained with judicial discretion up to the stage of framing of issues, subject to considerations such as delay, limitation, reason for delay, similarity of cause of action, prejudice, and injustice. The amended commercial procedure provisions concerning written statement timelines were held not to bar the present request, since the written statement had been filed with leave within the outer period and the suit had not yet reached the stage of issues.

Conclusion: The amendment incorporating the counter-claim was permitted and was not rejected on the grounds of limitation or procedural bar.

Final Conclusion: The defendant was allowed to carry out the amendment and proceed with the counter-claim, subject to consequential filing and service directions.

Ratio Decidendi: A counter-claim may be allowed after filing of the written statement, before framing of issues, where it is based on the same factual matrix and no material prejudice is caused, since Order VIII Rule 6A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 does not impose an absolute bar of time in such circumstances.

---