Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ABHAY AHUJA
Saffron Developers Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Premchand Resorts and Apartments – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This Interim Application seeks leave of this Court to produce certain documents consisting of balance sheets of the Defendant no.1 and email correspondence exchanged between the Plaintiff and the Defendant no.1 and thereafter to permit the Applicant to file further affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief or permit the Applicant to conduct further examination-in-chief to admit in evidence the documents sought to be produced through this application.
2. Mr.Aseem Naphade, learned Counsel, appearing for the Applicant has submitted that this application has been filed under Order XI Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Mr.Naphade has submitted that Rule 1 of the said Order provides that the Plaintiff shall file a list of documents and photocopies of all documents in its power, possession, control or custody pertaining to the Suit along with the plaint. Mr.Naphade submits that, that is the rule, however, exception to the said rule is provided in Rule 5 where with the leave of the Court, the documents which were in plaintiff’s power, possession, control or custody and not disclosed along with the plaint or within the
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.
The court held that lack of coordination between the plaintiff's director and legal counsel constituted reasonable cause for non-disclosure of documents, allowing their introduction in evidence.
Procedural rules should not obstruct substantial justice; reasonable cause for non-disclosure of documents must be interpreted liberally to ensure fair adjudication.
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....
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....
The stringent provisions of Order XI Rule 21 of the CPC should be applied only in extreme cases, where there is contumacy or a willful attempt to disregard the court's order.
(1) After Order XI Rule 1 has been amended with respect to suits before commercial courts and a specific provision/procedure has been prescribed with respect to suits before commercial division and b....
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
