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

2021 Supreme(Guj) 1083

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
N.V.ANJARIA, SANDEEP N. BHATT, JJ.
MURLIBHAI DUHILANOMAL CHHATWANI THROUGH POA HOLDER ANIL MURLIBHAI CHHATWANI - Appellant
Versus
MOHANBHAI DUHILANOMAL CHHATWANI - Respondent
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14667 of 2021
Decided On : 24-12-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For The Appellant : MR JIGAR M PATEL
For The Respondent: MR.NANDISH H THACKAR

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 226 and 227 - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order VIII, Rule 1 - Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 23 (4) and 29A - Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Section 12A - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 (b) and (c) - Seeking relief of declaration and permanent injunction - Petitioner submitted that trial Court has not properly considered various judgments/orders with regard to freezement of limitation period during pandemic situation - He has submitted that summons is served on defendant and period of 30 days was to expire – Held, petitioner was supposed to file his written statement after service of notice, he has requested for adjournment i.e. first returnable date after service - Petitioner is entitled to get benefit of that order as provisions of Commercial Courts Act and Order VIII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 are covered by directions of Court regarding limitation prescribed for proceedings under General Las or Special Laws - Though there is specific observations regarding Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, by that, in our opinion that itself does not mean to exclude other provisions of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 from applicability of the orders and it is relevant to note that word ‘proceedings’ also includes filing of pleadings i.e. written statement in present case, by defendant - On equitable ground also and in view of several orders passed by Apex Court, written statement, which is filed by present petitioner in the Commercial Suit is required to be taken on record - Therefore, impugned order passed by trial Court needs to be set aside - Petition allowed.

JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP N. BHATT, J.

1. The present petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the judgment and order passed by the 3rd Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat in Commercial Suit No.478 of 2021 dated 23.07.2021, below Exh.18, inter alia praying as under :

    “8.A This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of, or in the nature of, Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dated 23.07.2021 passed by the Court of 3rd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Surat below written statement – Exh.18 filed by the petitioner (Defendant No.2) in the proceedings of Commercial Suit No.478 of 2021 – Annexure-A and be further pleased to direct the Court of 3rd Additional Senior Civil, Surat to take on record the written statement (Exh.18) filed by the petitioner (Defendant No.2) in the proceedings of Commercial Suit No.478 of 2021;

B. Pending admission, disposal and final hearing of the above numbered writ petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to stay the further proceedings of Commercial Suit No.478 of 2021 lying before the Court of 3rd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Surat;

C. Ad interim relief in terms of aforesaid clause may kindly be granted;

D. Such others and further reliefs which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit to be granted in the interest of justice;”

2. Brief facts of the case are epitomized as under.

    2.1 Respondent No.1 – original plaintiff has filed the Suit being Small Commercial Suit No.225 of 2020 against the present petitioner – original defendant No.2 and respondent No.2 (original defendant No.1) and respondents No.3 to 29 (original defendants No.3 to 29) in the Court of Small Causes, Surat, seeking relief of declaration and permanent injunction.

2.2 The petitioner was served with the summons on 20.02.2020 and he has filed his appearance and on the returnable date i.e. on 05.03.2020, he has prayed for time to file written statement in the said proceedings. The proceedings of the said suit was adjourned to 24.03.2020.

2.3 Thereafter, COVID-19 pandemic situation was prevailing in the entire State and the Civil Court became non-functional due to lock down across the nation and the physical functioning of the Court was stopped for longer period. Therefore, the proceedings of the aforesaid civil suit were adjourned from time to time.

2.4 It was very difficult for the litigants even to approach their lawyers and visit their offices during that pandemic period.

2.5 After considering the scenario at the relevant point of time, the Hon’ble Apex Court has taken suo motu cognisance of the hardship faced by the litigants on account of COVID-19 pandemic situation in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020 and other allied applications, the Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 23.03.2020 has freezed the period of limitation, under the both the Laws - General Laws and the Special Laws, till further orders. Such limitation remained freezed till 14.10.2020, as submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner.

2.6 It the case of the petitioner that due to continuation of the pandemic situation and as per the practice prevailing during the pandemic situation, the petitioner (original defendant No.2) has contacted his advocate and written statement was dropped in Drop Box on 05.11.2020.

2.7 The proceedings of the aforesaid civil suit were adjourned to 28.12.2020.

2.8 However, the written statement at Exh.18 filed by the petitioner (defendant No.1) in the proceedings of Small Commercial Suit No.225 of 2020 was not taken on record and the impugned order was passed, whereby the matter was fixed for hearing to decide, as to whether the written statement filed by the petitioner deserves to be taken on record inasmuch as same was filed after expiry of 120 days.

2.9 Thereafter, the proceedings of the aforesaid civil suit came to be transferred to the Court of Civil Judge, Surat vide order dated 16.01.2021 passed by th

            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 Back to top