N.SATHISH KUMAR
Chennai Ananda Bhavan Kinfra P. O. Muringoor Koratti, Cochin-Thrissur Highway NH-47 Thrissur – Appellant
Versus
Adyar Ananda Bhavan Sweets & Snacks Rep. by its Partner K. T. Venkatesan Muthulakshmi Bhavan, Shastrinagar, Adyar, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Application has been filed to reject the plaint in C.S.No.982 of 2017 under Order VII Rule 11 of C.P.C.)
This Application has been filed by the defendant for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of C.P.C.
2. It is the main contention of the applicant that the suit as framed and filed by the Plaintiff is not maintainable. The plaintiff has not mentioned any provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. It is his further contention that the suit has been valued for three relief’s at Rs.9,000/- and paid a court fee of Rs.675/-. As far as Commercial Division Suits are concerned, under Section 12(1) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, relating to commercial disputes, the specific value of the commercial dispute in a suit should be determined, which has been stipulated Rupees One Crore. Subsequently, amendment was made in 2018, thereby reducing the minimum dispute value to Rs.3,00,000/-. Hence the Court fee paid is below the specified value. Hence the plaint has to be rejected. The Respondent disputed the same.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the Applicant mainly contended that the object of the Commercial Act provides to constitute commercial courts, commerc
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.