Compliance with procedural rules under Order XI of the CPC is mandatory for plaintiffs in commercial suits; failure to justify late document submissions results in dismissal of related applications.

ORDER :

Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.

1. The Civil Revision Petition (CRP) arises out of an order dated 15.12.2025 passed by the Additional Special Court in the cadre of District Judge for Trial and disposal of Commercial Dispute at Hyderabad (‘Commercial Court’) in I.A. No.29 of 2025 in COS No.1 of 2023, whereby the petitioner’s application was partly allowed.

2. The petitioner before us is the plaintiff in a Suit (COS No.1 of 2023) filed for recovery of money and interest. The plaintiff filed I.A.No.29 of 2025 for permitting the plaintiff to receive certain documents which were originally filed as photocopies with the Plaint.

3. The respondents/defendants opposed the application and the Commercial Court, after considering the case sought to be made by the parties, partly allowed the I.A. granting leave to the plaintiff to file additional documents i.e., a Certified Copy of the registered Sale Deed bearing No.6752 of 2023 dated 12.06.2023 and the orders passed by the learned National Company Law Tribunal (‘NCLT’) in CP (IB) No.361/09/HDB/2022 dated 22.02.2024 sought for subject to the relevancy, admissibility and proof of the said documents and upon payment of cost of Rs.2000/- payable to the respondents.

4. The present CRP has been filed against the impugned order to the extent of the Commercial Court in not permitting the petitioner to bring the remaining documents on record.

5. Both the parties are represented.

6. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner/plaintiff submits that the documents which were disallowed by the Commercial Court have been already part of the Plaint in the form of photocopy. The plaintiff however could not produce the additional documents in original at the time of filing of the Plaint and hence subsequently filed the I.A. for bringing these documents on record.

7. Counsel submits that the relevant Rule of Order XI of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as amended by The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 permits bringing such documents on record. It is also submitted that the defendants would not be prejudiced if the Trial Court allowed the documents to be received as additional documents in the Plaint.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/defendants submits that the petitioner has taken several adjournments in proceeding with the Suit and subsequently filed the I.A. at a belated stage, after framing of issues and the examination-in-chief of PW.1.

9. Upon hearing the submissions made on behalf of the parties, the first point which strikes this Court is that the petitioner filed the I.A. for receiving additional documents under Order VII Rule 14 of the CPC. The I.A. does not mention any provision under The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 even though the Suit admittedly is a Commercial Suit and is being tried by the Commercial Court at Hyderabad. The correct provision which should have been mentioned is Order XI Rule 1(4) of the CPC as amended by the 2015 Act.

10. Order XI of the CPC as amended by The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 relates to ‘Disclosure, Discovery and inspection of documents in suits before the commercial division of a high court or a commercial court.’ The relevant Sub-Rules under Rule 1 of Order XI are given below.

11. Order XI Rule 1 (1 to 6) sets out Disclosure and discovery of documents and the obligation thereto insofar as it relates to the Plaint of a Commercial Suit.

12. Order XI Rule 1(1) outlines a mandatory obligation on the plaintiff to file a list of all documents and photocopies of all documents, in its power, possession, control or custody, pertaining to the Suit, along with t