Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Bela Creation Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Anuj Textiles – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the main case and claims (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner seeks to introduce additional documents (Para 4 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. supreme court precedent on filing additional documents (Para 10 , 15 , 17) |
| 4. court's analysis on counsel negligence (Para 19 , 22) |
| 5. court rejects the petitioner's application (Para 24 , 27 , 29) |
1. The impugned order dated 24th February, 2022 rejects an application under Order VII Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), filed by the petitioner, as the defendant before the learned District Judge (Commercial Court) ("the Commercial Court", hereinafter) in CS (Comm) 294/2019 (Anuj Textiles v. Bela Creations Pvt. Ltd.), with costs of Rs.5000.
2. CS (Comm) 294/2019 was filed by the respondent-Anuj Textiles against the petitioner. The respondent claimed to have supplied fabric to the petitioner during the period 4th August, 2017 to 20th June, 2018, against which an amount of Rs.56.64,846/- was alleged to be due and payable by the petitioner to the respondent. The suit, therefore, sought a decree, in favour of the respondent and against the petitioner for Rs.56,64,846/- along with pendente lite and future interest @ 18
The court emphasized a liberal interpretation of procedural rules allowing additional documents to be admitted if reasonable cause is shown, particularly in extraordinary situations like a pandemic.
The court affirmed that documents not disclosed with the written statement in commercial cases cannot be admitted, but contradictory decisions on evidence closure were ruled unsustainable.
(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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the plaintiff to establish reasonable cause for non-disclosure of documents and the court's role in determining the sufficiency....
The court emphasized the strict adherence to document filing rules in commercial disputes, denying late submission of documents without establishing reasonable cause for prior non-disclosure.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the plaintiff to disclose all documents in its power, possession, control or custody, pertaining to the Suit, along with the pl....
Order XI Rule 1(7) of CPC, as applicable to commercial disputes, casts an obligation on defendant to file all documents in its power, possession, control or custody.
Parties in commercial disputes must timely disclose documents; late submissions require a compelling justification to avoid prejudicing the opposing party.
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
