Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
TEJAS KARIA
Condor Footwear (India) Limited – Appellant
Versus
Nexgen Footwear Private Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
TEJAS KARIA, J.
OA No.74/2025
1. This is an Original Appeal filed by Defendants under Rule 5 of Chapter II of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 (“DHC Rules”) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) against the Order dated 17.01.2025 (“Impugned Order”) passed by the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) of this Court in CS(COMM) No.605/2024.
2. Vide Impugned Order, the learned Joint Registrar has held as under:
“The pleadings have been completed.
The counsel for the defendant is objecting to the taking on record of the documents filed by the plaintiff alongside the replication. The objection is overruled since the documents are part of the pleading i.e. the replication & are not causing any prejudice at this stage.
The parties shall now file the photocopies of their admitted-documents, if not already filed and the joint schedule of the documents.
List the matter for admission-denial and making of exhibits on 25.03.2025.
3. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Defendants that the documents filed by the Plaintiffs along with the Replication was in response to the specific plea taken by the Defendants that the Plaint did not show any
The main legal point established in the judgment is that under Order XI Rule 5 of the CPC, additional documents may be permitted to be filed if they are relevant for the adjudication of the case and ....
(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 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.
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.
Parties in commercial disputes must timely disclose documents; late submissions require a compelling justification to avoid prejudicing the opposing party.
In commercial litigation, negligence or inadvertence does not constitute 'reasonable cause' for late document disclosure; strict adherence to procedural timelines is mandatory under the Commercial Co....
The Commercial Courts Act mandates strict disclosure obligations, requiring all documents to be submitted at the outset. Late submissions necessitate a clear justification for non-disclosure, which w....
The court emphasized strict adherence to procedural timelines in commercial disputes, concluding that introducing additional documents post-evidence closure undermines the intent of the Commercial Co....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the plaintiff to establish 'reasonable cause' for non-disclosure of documents along with the pleadings, as per the provision....
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
