SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
Bajaj Plasto Industries – Appellant
Versus
Pendo Plast Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Tushar Rao Gedela, J. (ORAL)

[The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode]

1. The petitioner by way of present petition challenges the order dated 16.07.2022 passed by the learned Trial Court allowing the application under Order 11 Rule 1 sub Rule 4 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, as amended by Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as `CPC') and permitted the respondent/Plaintiff to place on record additional documents.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the provisions of Order 11 (1) (4) of the CPC to submit that the Language employed in the said clause would circumscribe the power of the plaintiff as well as the Court to permit such of those documents which accompany suits which are in the nature of `urgent filing' and additionally, that the declaration ought to be made clearly in the statement of truth which is to accompany the suit.

3. Learned counsel also emphasises on the time limit prescribed of 30 days in sub-rule 4 to emphasise that the respondent/plaintiff ought to have taken steps within the time limit prescribed in clause 4. The respondent, not having done that, the Trial Court had

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top