JUDGMENT : Satish Chandra, CJ. This revision is directed against the dismissal of an application to amend the written statement. Learned, counsel pressed the amendment which sought to introduce a counter claim to the written statement. The amendment in respect of counter claim was rejected because the Defendant had not valued it and had not paid court-fees. Learned Counsel for the applicant rightly points out that the court-fee could be paid on the counter claim after it has been permitted to be added to the written statement. The valuation could have also been given by way of modification of the amendment application if the court had granted an opportunity for it. The Defendant was entitled to put in a counter claim and so the application for amendment in this respect ought to have been allowed. 2. Learned Counsel for the opposite party invited my attention to Rule 6-A of Order VIII CPC. It provides as: 6-A. Counter-claim by Defendant-(1) A Defendant in a suit may, in addition to his right of pleading a set-off under rule 6, set up, by way of counter claim against the claim of the Plaintiff, any right or claim in respect of a cause of action accruing to the, Defendant against the Plaintiff either before or after the filing of the suit but before the Defendant has delivered his defence or before the time limited for delivering his defence has expired, whether such counter-claim is in the nature of a claim for damages or not: Provided that such counter claim shall not exceed the pecuniary limits of the jurisdiction of the Court. (2) Such counter claim shall have the same effect as a cross suit so as to enable the Court to pronounce a final judgment in the same suit, both on the original claim and on the counter claim. (3) The Plaintiff shall be at liberty to file a written statement in answer to the counter claim of the Defendant within such period as may be fixed by the Court. (4) The counter claim shall be treated as a plaint and governed by the rules applicable to plaints. 3. Learned Counsel submitted that a counter-claim can be added to a written statement only if it is either filed before the Defendant has delivered his defence or before the time limited for delivering his defence. (4) The counter claim shall be treated as a plaint and governed by the rules applicable to plaints. 3. Learned Counsel submitted that a counter-claim can be added to a written statement only if it is either filed before the Defendant has delivered his defence or before the time limited for delivering his defence. In the present case the Defendant had already filed a written statement and therefore, the prayer for adding a counter-claim was barred. I am unable to agree. Under Clause (1) of Rule 6-A, the time limit is in respect of the cause of action. The cause of action for the counterclaim should accrue to the Defendant either before or after the filing of the suit but before the Defendant has delivered his defence or before the time for delivering his defence has expired. The limitation of time is clearly in respect of the cause of action on which the counter-claim is based. The clause does not prescribe any time-limit for the making of the counter-claim. 4. A counter-claim is usually made in the written statement. The provision would become unworkable if it is construed as to provide a time limit for filing a counter claim. Since the counterclaim can, in law, validly be filed as part of the written statement, the limitation of time that it should be filed before the Defendant has delivered his defence would make it un-workable. This also goes to suggest that the limitation of time was in respect of the accrual of the cause of action for the counter-claim and not for its actual being raised in the suit. The application for amendment in so far as it related to the counterclaim was hence not barred by Rule 6-A of Order VIII CPC. 5. It is true that the defect in the amendment application that there was no valuation given to the counter-claim could have been remedied if the defect had been pointed out to him. Of course, court-fee can be paid only after the amendment has been allowed. The grounds of dismissal in so far as they related to counter claim were not valid. 6. Rule 6-B of Order VIII provides that where any Defendant seeks to rely upon any ground as supporting a right of counter claim, he shall, in his written statement, state specifically that he does so by way of counter-claim. The grounds of dismissal in so far as they related to counter claim were not valid. 6. Rule 6-B of Order VIII provides that where any Defendant seeks to rely upon any ground as supporting a right of counter claim, he shall, in his written statement, state specifically that he does so by way of counter-claim. This rule does not apply where specifically a counterclaim is raised, but confines itself to a ground mentioned in the written statement as supporting a right to counter-claim. Here the Defendant admittedly wanted to introduce a specific counter claim in the written statement. Under the circumstances, Rule 6-B was not attracted. 7. The revision succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order is set aside in so far as it relates to the amendment in respect of the counterclaim. The matter is sent back to the trial court for passing a fresh order in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made above. The parties will bear their own costs.