The court affirmed that defendants lose the right to file a written statement if not submitted within the prescribed 120 days, highlighting the necessity of adhering to procedural timelines in commercial disputes.

JUDGMENT :

ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.

1. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent of the learned Advocates for the respective parties. Records and proceedings of the learned Trial Court were called for perusal vide order dated 22.12.2025.

2. The present petition is filed by the original defendant Nos. 1 to 4 and 6 in Commercial Suit No.2 of 2019 in order to challenge orders dated 15.09.2022, passed by the learned District Judge-9 on applications at Exhibit Nos. 59 and 70 in Commercial Suit No.2 of 2019. The respondent No.1 is the original plaintiff and respondent Nos.2 to 5 are original Defendant Nos.5,7,8 and 9 respectively. The parties will hereinafter be referred to as “plaintiff” and “defendants”.

3. The plaintiff had filed a suit for recovery of amount against defendant Nos.1 to 6, being Special Civil Suit No.8606 of 2018. Defendant Nos.7 to 9 are arrayed as proper parties to the suit, against whom decree for recovery of money is not sought. Upon being served with the suit summons, defendant Nos.1 to 6 entered appearance in the matter on 18.07.2018. The defendant Nos.1 to 6 filed application dated 18.07.2018 seeking time to file written statement which was allowed by the learned Civil Court.

4. The defendant Nos.1 and 2 filed application for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC. Similar application was filed by defendant Nos.3,4 and 6. The said applications are marked as Exhibit Nos.30 and 33. Both these applications were filed on 07.08.2018. Perusal of the applications will demonstrate that the said defendants contended that the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division did not have jurisdiction to entertain the suit since the dispute raised by the plaintiff was a commercial dispute within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT , 2015.

5. The learned Civil Court passed order dated 28.01.2019, transferring the suit to Commercial Court. The parties were directed to appear before the Commercial Court on 11.02.2019. The present petitioners/defendant Nos.1 to 4 and 6 did not file their written statement in the civil suit while the suit was pending before the learned Civil Court. It will be pertinent to mention that the learned Civil Court had also not passed any order to proceed without written statement against the defendants.

6. In view of the order dated 28.01.2019, the matter was made over to the learned Commercial Court. The case record was received on 25.02.2019. On 27.02.2019, the present petitioners/defendant Nos.1 to 4 and 6 filed application seeking time to file written statement, which was allowed by the learned Commercial Court by passing one word order, “Granted”. Defendant Nos.1 to 4 and 6 did not file their written statement. In such circumstances, the plaintiff/respondent No.1 filed application dated 26.06.2019 vide Exhibit No. 59 for passing order to proceed without written statement against defendant Nos.1 to 6. Thereafter, the petitioners/defendant Nos.1 to 4 and 6 filed application dated 26.10.2021 vide Exhibit No. 70, seeking permission to file written statement. The learned Commercial Court passed two separate orders on 15.09.2022 by virtue of which the application at Exhibit No.59 filed by the plaintiff was allowed and suit was ordered to proceed against defendant Nos.1 to 6 without their written statement and the application filed by defendant Nos.1 to 4 and 6 for permission to file written statement at Exhibit No.70 was rejected.

7. The learned Commercial Court has ob