IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ADMIRALTY AND VICE ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION COMMERCIAL ADMIRALTY SUIT NO. 19 OF 2025 Captain Arun Amritlal Sethi ...Plaintiff V/s.

M. V. Som Silver IMO 7522100) ...Defendant Mr.Siddharth Manek i/b Crawford Bayley and Co. for the Plaintiff.

Ms. Vatsala Toprani i/b Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe for the Defendant.

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J.

DATE : 9^th MAY, 2025 P.C. :

1. Today the matter has been listed at serial number 1 for the First Case Management Hearing in as much as on 28^th March, 2025, this Court had directed the Plaintiff and thereafter, the Defendant to file affidavits of documents along with compilation of documents and discovery and inspection and statements of admission and denial were to be exchanged by 25^th April, 2025.

2. However, today when the matter is called out, Mr. Manek, learned Counsel appears for the Plaintiff and submits that the Plaintiff has been unable to file affidavit of Plaintiff and compilation of documents and seeks extension of time.

3. The lawyers and litigants appearing in the Commercial Courts have to be aware of the provisions of the Code of Civil Provisions, 1908 (the “CPC”) as applicable to the commercial disputes.

4. Order XV-A of the CPC as applicable to the commercial disputes provides that the Court shall hold the first Case Management Hearing, not later than four week’s from the date filing of affidavit of admission and denial of documents by all parties to the Suit.

5. It is further provided that in a Case Management Hearing, after hearing the parties and once the Court finds that there are issues of facts and law which require to be tried, the Court may pass an order including framing of issues, listing witnesses to be examined, fixing the date by which affidavit of evidence of the witnesses of the parties is to be recorded, etc. including setting time limits for parties and their Advocates for oral arguments.

6. There is also a time limit for the completion of a trial to be fixed and Rule 3 of Order XV-A of the CPC provides that the Court shall ensure that the arguments are closed not later than six months from the date of the first Case Management Hearing.

7. Today the matter has been listed for the first Case Management Hearing, however, the hearing cannot proceed in as much as the affidavits and compilation of documents have not been filed and time is being sought.

8. Under Rule 6 of Order XV-A of the CPC, which relates to powers of the Court in a Case Management Hearing, although this Court has power to extend and shorten the time for compliance of any practice, direction or order if it finds sufficient reason to do so and also adjourn. Under sub-Rule 2 of Rule 6 of the CPC, it is provided that when the Court passes an order in exercise of its powers under this order, it may make it subject to conditions, including a condition to pay a sum of money and specify the consequence of failure to do so.

9. It is also specifically provided in Rule 7 of the CPC that the Court shall not adjourn the Case Management Hearing for the sole reason that the advocate appearing on behalf of a party is not present and in Rule 8 of the CPC consequence of non-compliance with the orders is provided.

10. It is provided that if the party fails to comply with the order of the Court passed in a Case Management Hearing, the Court shall have the power to condone such non-compliance by payment of costs or foreclose the non-compliant party’s right to file affidavits, conduct cross-examination of witnesses, file written submissions, address oral arguments, to make further arguments in the trial, etc. or even dismiss the Plaint or allow the Suit.

11. Even yesterday this Court had passed a couple of orders that after giving detailed directions to file affidavit of evidence and documents, discovery and inspection and statements of admission and denial if the time lines are not adhered to the same has a cascading effect not only with respect to the proceedings in the matter but also