Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Ficus Pax Private Limited – Respondent
ORDER :
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.
The petitioner/defendant-IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Company’ for short) is at the doors of this Court, calling in question an order dated 22-07-2025 passed by the XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Dedicated Commercial Court), Bengaluru in Commercial O.S.No.307 of 2024 rejecting an application- I.A.No.III filed by the defendant under Order XI Rule 1 of the CPC, whereby leave was sought to bring forth documents belatedly into the evidentiary fold.
2. Facts adumbrated are as follows:-
The respondent is the plaintiff and the petitioner is the defendant. The plaintiff institutes a commercial suit in Com.O.S.No.307 of 2024 seeking the following prayer:
“(a) Direct the defendant to admit the plaintiff’s claim under Claim No.11026939 and pay the claim amount of ₹3,70,68,580/- to the plaintiff in terms of the IFFCO-TOKIO Bharat SookshmaUdyam Suraksha Policy bearing No.12343946 issued to the plaintiff by the defendant, along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of the claim intimation till the date of payment.”
The issue in the lis does not pertain to the merit of the matter. The defendant
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....
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....
Order XI Rule 1(c)(ii) of the CPC permits document production to counter claims made by defendants, allowing flexibility in commercial suits.
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.
The Commercial Courts Act mandates strict disclosure obligations, requiring all documents to be submitted at the outset. Late submissions necessitate a clear justification for non-disclosure, which w....
Order XI Rule 1(7) of CPC, as applicable to commercial disputes, casts an obligation on defendant to file all documents in its power, possession, control or custody.
The court allowed the production of documents not annexed to the plaint due to lack of coordination, establishing that reasonable cause for non-disclosure can be recognized under procedural rules.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
