High Court of Gujarat Allows Appeal in Contract Dispute — Remands Case for Fresh Consideration of Counterclaim Due to Violation of Natural Justice. Failure to Provide Opportunity to Lead Evidence on Counterclaim Under Order 8 Rule 6A CPC Warrants Remand.

High Court: Gujarat High Court In Favour of Accused
  • 17
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Executive Engineer of Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board, filed a suit for damages of Rs. 17,28,855.65 against the respondent, Kataria Construction Co., for delay in completing a construction contract. The respondent filed a written statement-cum-counterclaim alleging that delays were caused by the appellant's actions, including late sanction of design, hard rock cutting, and unilateral increase in steel quantity. The trial court dismissed the suit and allowed the counterclaim, awarding Rs. 6,52,050 with 12% interest. The appellant appealed, arguing that the trial court did not provide an opportunity to lead evidence on the counterclaim. The High Court found that the trial court framed issues but did not give the appellant a chance to rebut the counterclaim evidence, violating natural justice. The court set aside the decree and remanded the case for fresh trial, directing the trial court to allow both parties to lead evidence on the counterclaim and decide afresh. The appeal was allowed, and the parties were directed to appear before the trial court on 21/04/2026.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Counterclaim - Opportunity to Lead Evidence - Order 8 Rule 6A, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The trial court allowed the defendant's counterclaim without affording the plaintiff an opportunity to lead evidence in rebuttal, which is a violation of natural justice - Held that the matter must be remanded for fresh consideration after giving both parties a fair chance to present evidence (Paras 5-7).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the trial court erred in allowing the counterclaim without providing the plaintiff an opportunity to lead evidence in rebuttal, thereby violating principles of natural justice.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is allowed. The judgment and decree dated 08/03/2000 passed by the learned Second Joint Civil Judge (SD), Kachchh at Bhuj in Special Civil Suit No. 210 of 1991 is set aside. The matter is remanded to the trial court for fresh consideration. The trial court shall give opportunity to both parties to lead evidence on the counterclaim and decide the suit afresh in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the trial court on 21/04/2026. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Counterclaim
  • Natural Justice
  • Opportunity to Lead Evidence
  • Order 8 Rule 6A CPC
  • Remand
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (GUJ) (03) 129

R/First Appeal No. 2274 of 2000

2026-03-25

J. C. Doshi

Mr. Vishrut Jani for Mr. R.C. Jani for the Appellant(s) No. 1, Notice Served for the Defendant(s) No. 1

Executive Engineer

Kataria Construction Co.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

First appeal against judgment and decree in a civil suit for damages and counterclaim.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to set aside the trial court's decree allowing the counterclaim and dismissing the suit.

Filing Reason

Appellant contended that the trial court did not provide an opportunity to lead evidence on the counterclaim, violating natural justice.

Previous Decisions

Trial court dismissed the suit and allowed the counterclaim, awarding Rs. 6,52,050 with 12% interest per annum.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in allowing the counterclaim without providing the plaintiff an opportunity to lead evidence in rebuttal. Whether the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the trial court framed issues but did not give the plaintiff a chance to lead evidence on the counterclaim, violating natural justice. Respondent argued that the trial court had given sufficient opportunity and the appellant failed to avail it.

Ratio Decidendi

The trial court's failure to provide the plaintiff an opportunity to lead evidence on the counterclaim amounts to a violation of principles of natural justice, warranting remand for fresh trial.

Judgment Excerpts

The trial court has not given any opportunity to the plaintiff to lead evidence on the counterclaim. The trial court has committed an error in allowing the counterclaim without giving opportunity to the plaintiff to lead evidence in rebuttal. The matter is required to be remanded to the trial court for fresh consideration.

Procedural History

The appellant (plaintiff) filed Special Civil Suit No. 210 of 1991 for damages. The respondent (defendant) filed a written statement-cum-counterclaim. The trial court dismissed the suit and allowed the counterclaim on 08/03/2000. The appellant filed the present first appeal against that decree.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 8 Rule 6A
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Gujarat Allows Appeal in Contract Dispute — Remands Case for Fresh Consideration of Counterclaim Due to Violation of Natural Justice. Failure to Provide Opportunity to Lead Evidence on Counterclaim Under Order 8 Rule 6A CPC Warrants R...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal in Property Dispute Over Unregistered Relinquishment Deed. Court Holds That a Deed of Relinquishment Without Consideration Requires Registration Under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908, and Remits Matter ...