JUDGMENT :

This is an application seeking amendment of plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), and it also raises issues pertaining to Order XI of the CPC, as applicable to commercial suits, in the light of the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

2. The plaintiffs have filed this suit for recovery of specific amounts from the defendant. The plaintiffs filed documents alongwith the plaint in support of their pleadings and as per the requirement of Order XI of the CPC, applicable to commercial Courts, they also filed a statement of truth in the form of declaration as per explanation to Order XI Rule 1(3) of the CPC. The said statement of truth specifically records that the plaintiffs examined all relevant documents and that all documents in power, possession, control or custody of the plaintiffs, pertaining to the facts and circumstances of the proceedings, were disclosed with copies thereof annexed to the plaint and that the plaintiffs did not have any other documents in their power, possession, control or custody.

3. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiffs have moved the instant application under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC, seeking amendment of the pleadings. The plaintiffs are not only seeking amendment of pleadings but also seek to place on record further documents. The amendment is sought as per Schedule I annexed to the application and various documents are sought to be placed on record. It is an admitted position that most of these documents were indeed in the power, possession, control and custody of the plaintiffs at the time of the filing of the suit. Thus, in essence, the present application for amendment has to be considered, not only on the touchstone of the requirement of Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC, but also Order XI of the CPC, as applicable to commercial suits.

4. In the light of the fact that the plaintiffs are required to show reasonable cause for non disclosure of the aforesaid documents that were in their power, possession, control and custody and yet were not filed under Order XI Rule 1 of the CPC, the application of Rule 1(5) thereof, comes into play. The applicant in the present application appears to be focusing more on Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC and the statements made therein do not really focus on the aforementioned requirement of Order XI Rule 1(5) of the CPC, for disclosing reasonable cause for non disclosure of such documents alongwith the plaint.

5. The defendant has not opposed the amendment in its entirety, considering that the amendment also pertains to pleadings sought to be introduced with regard to events subsequent to filing of the suit. But, the objection pertaining to Order XI of the CPC has been raised specifically in respect of documents now sought to be introduced by the plaintiffs, which were indeed in their power, possession, control and custody at the time of the filing of the proceedings. The arguments of the rival parties have revolved around the law that is developing in the context of Order XI of the CPC, as applicable to commercial suits.

6. Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the applicants / plaintiffs submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the question of demonstrating reasonable cause for non disclosure of such documents alongwith the plaint under Order XI Rule 1(5) of the CPC, may not arise, for the reason that the plaintiffs are entitled to invoke Order XI Rule 1(1)(c)(ii) of the CPC. It is the case of the plaintiffs that after they filed the suit and pressed for grant of interim reliefs, the defendant set up a case, which according to the plaintiffs is a dishonest case, due to which ad-interim reliefs granted by the learned Single Judge of this Court were vacated by the Division Bench of this Court, rendering certain observations against the plaintiffs. In that light, it was submitted that the plaintiffs were now constrained to file the said documents alongwith the pres