Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
N.J.JAMADAR, J
I K Marine Agencies Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Tata Steel Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petitions challenge order striking defendants' written statements (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. defendants argue timely ws post-service and extensions (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. plaintiff demands strict 120-day ws filing enforcement (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. cpc mandates absolute 120-day ws limit commercially (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. def1 summons served on court appearance date (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 6. summons requires plaint copy for valid service (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 7. extensions need reasons; condone within 120 days (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 8. ws filed timely despite extension formalities (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 9. substantive justice trumps procedural rigidity (Para 42 , 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 10. quash order; restore defendants' written statements (Para 46) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, and, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, heard finally.
2. These Petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, take exception to a common order dated 25 July 2025 passed by the learned District Judge, presiding over the Commercial Court at Panvel, whereby the applications (Exh.22 and 24) f
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
