Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATUREAT MADRAS
K.R. SHRIRAM, C.J., SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
R. Radha @ Radha Ramalingam – Appellant
Versus
Madhan Raj – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. loan recovery suits initiated without adequate pleadings. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court affirming jurisdiction, limitation, and reliance on documentary evidence. (Para 3 , 4 , 8 , 10) |
| 3. contentions regarding procedural violations and implications. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. established comprehensions of verification standards and their importance. (Para 9 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. conditions for remanding appeals, allowing opportunity for defense. (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT :
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.
On the ground that loans advanced by the respondent herein were not repaid by the appellant(s), the respondent filed two suits before the Commercial Court, Salem. In C.O.S.No.25 of 2022, the respondent/plaintiff claimed a sum of Rs.4,52,15,725/-, which included the principal sum of Rs.3,41,00,000/-. The sole defendant therein is the appellant in Appeal (CAD) No.12 of 2023. In C.O.S.No.26 of 2022, the respondent/plaintiff claimed a sum of Rs.1,20,74,401/-, which included the principal claim of Rs.90,00,000/-. The defendants therein are the appellants in Appeal (CAD) No.13 of 2023.
2. The appellant(s) herein did not file the written statements within the specified time limit from the date of receipt of the
Parties must comply with verification requirements in commercial disputes; failure to do so may disallow their written statements as evidence, but such non-compliance can be rectified under certain c....
The court ruled that the statutory requirement for pleadings in commercial disputes is mandatory, permitting no reliance on unverified statements, but allowed the appellants to remedy this by deposit....
The court affirmed that defendants lose the right to file a written statement if not submitted within the prescribed 120 days, highlighting the necessity of adhering to procedural timelines in commer....
The court established the discretion of the Commercial Court in accepting written statements in transferred suits and highlighted the applicability of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 to suits filed b....
Mandatory provision of filing written statement within 120 days from receipt of summons in case of a commercial suit will not be applicable in case of a transferred suit.
In commercial suits, a written statement filed beyond 30 days without a condonation application may not be accepted, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural timelines.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the defendant to file the written statement within the prescribed period, the consequences of failing to do so, and the applica....
The timeline for filing a written statement in commercial suits starts from the date the plaintiff rectifies any court fee deficiencies, ensuring fairness and equity in the judicial process.
The main legal point established is that the doctrine of relation back can be applied to deem a written statement as filed within the limitation period, considering the circumstances preventing its t....
Defendants must file a formal application to extend time for the written statement beyond thirty days, as failure to do so results in forfeiture of the right to file.
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
