M. I. ARUN
M. Gouthamchand S/o Late Sri Motilal – Appellant
Versus
Sanjay Kumar, S/O Late Sri Badarmal – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Aggrieved by the order dated 01.06.2024 passed on I.A.Nos.4 to 6 in Commercial O.S.No.770/2023 by the Court of LXXXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Commercial Court, Bengaluru, the plaintiff therein has preferred this writ petition.
2. The petitioner filed I.A.Nos.4 to 6 before the Commercial Court under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) read with Order XI Rule 1(5) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (for short 'the Act') for recalling of PW-1, re-opening of the case of the plaintiff and seeking permission to produce certain documents. The same has been rejected by the Commercial Court.
3. The case of the petitioner is that he is in retail business of gold and silver bullion and that the defendant is a regular customer and that he had purchased certain jewellery worth Rs.1,45,91,947/-, for which he did not pay the agreed consideration and hence, the Commercial suit came to be filed. It is submitted that along with the plaint, the suit document as contemplated under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 has been produced by the plaintiff/petitioner herein. However, in the cross- examination, the defendant/respondent herein had put questions denying
The court established that timely disclosure of documents is crucial in commercial suits, with allowances for later disclosure contingent on reasonable cause.
The court emphasized strict adherence to procedural timelines in commercial disputes, concluding that introducing additional documents post-evidence closure undermines the intent of the Commercial Co....
In commercial litigation, negligence or inadvertence does not constitute 'reasonable cause' for late document disclosure; strict adherence to procedural timelines is mandatory under the Commercial Co....
Procedural violations do not impede justice if they do not cause prejudice, allowing for additional documents under specific circumstances.
Procedural violations should not impede justice, and courts must favor substantial justice over rigid adherence to rules, particularly when no prejudice to the opposing party has been demonstrated.
The court established that mere reference to documents in a written statement does not satisfy the requirement of 'reasonable cause' for late submission under the amended Civil Procedure Rules.
Procedural rules should not obstruct substantial justice; reasonable cause for non-disclosure of documents must be interpreted liberally to ensure fair adjudication.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the plaintiff to disclose all documents in its power, possession, control or custody, pertaining to the Suit, along with the pl....
The inherent powers of the court allow the acceptance of documents essential for a case, even if procedural provisions are misquoted, prioritizing access to relevant evidence.
The court affirmed that documents not disclosed with the written statement in commercial cases cannot be admitted, but contradictory decisions on evidence closure were ruled unsustainable.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.