Topic

Order VIII Rule 6A CPC

2 articlesLatest July 2026
Section 31(3) Arbitration Act | Counter-Claim Against Co-Respondent Maintainable Under Arbitration Agreement : Kerala HC
Case Law Analysis
|Kerala High Court

Section 31(3) Arbitration Act | Counter-Claim Against Co-Respondent Maintainable Under Arbitration Agreement : Kerala HC

Kerala High Court rules that a counter-claim by one respondent against a co-respondent is maintainable under the arbitration agreement, overriding procedural limitations under the CPC. The decision clarifies that arbitration agreements prevail over technical objections, enabling broader dispute resolution in multi-party commercial disputes.

Order VIII Rule 6A CPC | Counter-Claim Permissible Even After Issues Framed if Substantive Justice Demands: Bombay HC
Case Law Analysis
|Bombay High Court

Order VIII Rule 6A CPC | Counter-Claim Permissible Even After Issues Framed if Substantive Justice Demands: Bombay HC

Bombay High Court rules that counter-claims under Order VIII Rule 6A CPC can be allowed even after a five-year delay if rigid procedural timelines would defeat substantive justice. The judgment emphasizes judicial discretion to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and ensure privity, setting a precedent for flexible interpretation of limitation in civil suits.