Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.— Heard Sri S.K.Mehrotra, learned counsel for the petitioner. None appeared on behalf of the respondents. 2. Writ petition is directed against revisional order dated 10th January, 2001 passed by VIIth Additional District Judge, Sultanpur allowing revision filed by Zila Panchayat permitting amendment in written statement sought under Order VIII, Rule 6-AC.P.C. for counter-claim on the property in dispute. 3. It is contended that Revisional Court has not considered that counter claim set up by respondent was highly barred by time and since under Order VIII, Rule 6-A(4) C.P.C., counter claims is to be treated as a plaint and governed by the rules applicable to plaints, it was incumbent upon Revisional Court to consider the same to find out counter claim set up by the defendant is within the period of limitation or not. Even otherwise, it is beyond the scope of Order VIII Rule 6-A as it was filed after evidence was already recorded and not before the defendant has delivered his defence as is the condition prescribed in sub rule (1) of Rule 6-A of Order VIII, C.P.C. 4. I find substance in the submission. 5. The kind of amendment sought by defendants/respondents refers to the possession and construction on the property in question by the petitioners without giving the dates on which it is allowed to have been done though from the plaint it appears that possession of property in question and construction was claimed to have been made by petitioners since 1982 and therefore ex facie amendment sought by way of counter claim was barred by limitation. Moreover, the said amendment has been sought after evidence was over and thus also it is beyond the scope of Order VIII, Rule 6-A C.P.C.. It was not in a manner of amendment under Order VIII but is an amendment sought for setting up a counter claim under Order VIII Rule 6-A and the Court below has erred in law by ignoring to consider the relevant conditions in which such counter claim could have been set up by the defendant. The impugned revisional order therefore cannot sustain. 6. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned revisional order dated 10th January, 2001 is hereby set aside. The trial Court is directed to proceed with the suit expeditiously in accordance with law. _