M. I. ARUN
N. BABU REDDY S/O LATE NARAYAN REDDY – Appellant
Versus
EIT SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Aggrieved by the order dated 13.06.2024 passed by XI Additional District Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, on I.A. Nos. 10 to 12 in Com. O.S. No. 104/2022, the defendant therein has preferred this writ petition.
2. The defendant has filed his written statement within the time stipulated, but it does not comply with the provisions of Order VI Rule 15-A of CPC as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The written statement was not verified in the manner provided and as per Order VI Rule 15A(4) of CPC, the defendant cannot rely upon such pleadings for leading evidence. It is submitted that the petitioner realized the mistake after the evidence of the plaintiff was closed and the trial court ordered that the petitioner/defendant cannot lead his evidence. Immediately, he filed I.A. No. 10 under Section 151 of CPC to recall the said order of the trial court, I.A. No. 11 under Section 151 of CPC with a prayer to permit the defendant to file the statement of truth in support of his written statement and I.A. No. 12 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Section 151 of CPC praying to condone the delay in filing I.A. No. 11. The trial court has dismissed the
The court established that non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements can be treated as a curable defect to prevent injustice in commercial litigation.
Without taking the avowed object of quick resolution of commercial disputes away from the 2015 Act, rules of procedure cannot be given precedence in a manner so as to defeat the substantive rights of....
The curable nature of procedural defects and the directory nature of procedural provisions under the CPC and the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
(1) Amendment – It is the settled law that the amendment can be made in pleadings which includes plaint and written statement and in view of settled propositions of law the applications in any procee....
In commercial suits, a written statement filed beyond 30 days without a condonation application may not be accepted, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural timelines.
The court affirmed that the timelines for filing written statements are directory in non-commercial disputes, allowing the defendant an opportunity to submit his statement upon payment of costs.
Section 15 of Act, 2015 deals with transfer of pending cases.
The mandatory timeframe for filing a written statement is reset when service of summons does not include a copy of the plaint, thereby allowing acceptance of the written statement if filed within 120....
Point of Law : Honourable Supreme Court has held that amended provisions of Orders V and VIII of Code are mandatory.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the defendant to file the written statement within the prescribed period, the consequences of failing to do so, and the applica....
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.