Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
At Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
Piccadily Hotels Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. Present petition has been filed seeking quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 22.11.2022 passed by learned District Judge (Commercial Court), North District, Rohini Court, in Commercial Suit bearing CS(COMM) No.55/2019. Further seeks direction to restore the abovementioned commercial suit filed by the appellant.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that earlier also similar issue came up before this Court in FAO(COMM) 56/2023 titled as "Bharat Bhushan Sawhney vs. M/s Baso Hospitality LLP (Shree Rathnam) & Ors." and same was allowed vide order dated 07.03.2023 wherein recorded as under:
"Present appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 02nd November, 2022 passed by the Ld. District Judge (Commercial Court), North District, Rohini Court in Commercial Suit in CS (Comm) No. 228/2019 on the ground that the learned District Judge (Commercial Court) has erroneously returned the plaint of the Appellant under Order VII Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
Yesterday, when the matter had been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the appellant had stated that though the suit was initially filed as a commercial sui
The nature of a suit cannot change based on the judge before whom it is listed.
Jurisdiction over commercial transactions and the application of procedural rules for returning plaints to the appropriate Court.
The court ruled that defendants cannot forfeit their right to file a written statement due to the court's failure to clearly communicate the commercial nature of the suit, emphasizing the need for pr....
The court held that failure to inform defendants of the commercial nature of the suit led to their inability to file a timely written statement, which was unjust and warrants restoration of rights.
The Commercial Courts Act does not preclude the applicability of Order IX Rule 7 of CPC, allowing defendants to set aside exparte orders.
Suits misclassified as commercial must be treated under ordinary civil jurisdiction; designation does not create a distinct court.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Commercial Courts Act does not exclude the application of Section 24 of the CPC to commercial disputes of a specified value, and the power....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the strict construction of the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, the requirement to consider the nature of the proposed amendment before ....
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
