The timeline for filing replies to counter claims under the Commercial Courts Act is strictly 120 days, and extensions must adhere to the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code.

JUDGMENT :

Soumen Sen, J.

1. The appeal involves the question as to whether the timeline specified in Order VIII Rule 1 as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 would apply to the timeline within which reply to the counter claim in the written statement sometimes also referred to as an additional written statement is to be filed by the plaintiff.

2. The learned Single Judge declined to extend the time to file additional written statement beyond 120 days and had rejected the application filed by the plaintiff for extension of time to file additional written statement beyond that time.

3. At the outset, Mr. Utpal Bose, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has raised the question of maintainability of the appeal. Mr. Bose has relied upon the proviso to Section 13 (1-A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 to argue that an appeal can lie only from such orders as are specifically enumerated under Order XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned senior counsel has also referred to Section 13(2) of the said Act to show that no appeal can lie from any order or decree otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of the said Act and the said sub-section has specifically excluded application of Letters Patent of a High Court. The learned Senior Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kandla Export Corporation & Anr. V. OCI Corporation & Anr., 2018 (14) SCC 715 paragraphs 13 and 14 in support of the said submission.

4. However, we invited the learned counsel for the parties to argue on the issue of maintainability as well as on merits.

5. Mr. S.N. Mitra, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that the Commercial Courts Act has not specifically dealt with the right of the plaintiff to file additional pleading there has been no amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure as far as the time limit prescribed for filing additional written statement under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The learned Senior Counsel has referred to the amendment in Order VIII Rule 1 of the CPC to show that the legislature in its wisdom has only amended the said provision whereas the other provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure in relation to filing of counter- claim or subsequent pleadings have not been touched. Mr. Mitra submits that when a written statement is filed with the counter-claim, there is no requirement to take out a writ of summons. It was for this reason that Order VIII Rule 6A(3) requires the Court to fix a time within which the plaintiff is required to answer to the counter-claim of the defendant. It is the duty of the Court to fix a time within which such pleading has to be delivered. Mr. Mitra has further submitted that when the Rule is silent with regard to the time frame within which the additional pleading is required to be filed, the Court has the power to enlarge the time in the event the Court initially did not fix the time. It is submitted that courts in such circumstances have held that in terms of Order VIII Rule 6A(3) of CPC the trial court is expected to fix time for filing written statement to the counter- claim. The default as mentioned in Rule 6E would apply only when time