Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
DEEPAK GUPTA
M3M India Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
MGF Developments Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.
Petitioner herein is the plaintiff in civil suit No. 4 of 2023 titled ‘M3M India Private Limited Vs. MGF Developments Limited & Ors.’, pending before learned Additional District Judge-cum-Presiding Officer, Exclusive Commercial Court at Gurugram exercising jurisdiction under Commercial Courts Act, 2015 [in short – ‘commercial court’]. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 05.03.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby Commercial Court has dismissed the application filed by the said petitioner under Order XI Rule 1 (5) CPC for producing certain additional documents.
2.1 Defendants No.1 and 2 (respondents N: 1 & 2 herein) were owner of the suit land. Collaboration agreement dated 23.11.2016 (Annexure P-2) was executed between the plaintiff and defendants No.1 & 2 regarding the said land; and an amount of Rs.88 crores was paid by the plaintiff to the said defendants, which as per plaintiff’s case was a refundable security. Irrevocable power of attorney was executed by defendant No.1 & 2 in plaintiff’s favour on the same day i.e. 23.11.2016. The plaintiff was represented by one Mr. Ravi Khera. On 24.11.2016, a supplementary agreement is purported to have been exec
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....
(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 court established that mere reference to documents in a written statement does not satisfy the requirement of 'reasonable cause' for late submission under the amended Civil Procedure Rules.
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....
The court affirmed that documents not disclosed with the written statement in commercial cases cannot be admitted, but contradictory decisions on evidence closure were ruled unsustainable.
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....
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....
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
