SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
S.J. KATHAWALLA, J
Leitz Tooling Systems India Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Bharat Bhogilal Patel – Respondent
REVIEW PETITION (L) NO. 15 OF 2019 IN COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 316 OF 2018 | NOTICE OF MOTION COMMERCIAL DIVISION (L) NO.2118 OF 2018



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Rashmin Khandekar, Mr. Shashwat Rai
For the Respondents: Mr. Nausher Kohli, Mr. K.R. Parekh

The amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure under the Commercial Courts Act apply only to commercial disputes of a specified value; disputes below this threshold must adhere to the unamended CPC.

Headnote:(A) Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Section 16 - Amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Applicability of amendments limited to commercial disputes of a Specified Value - The court interpreted that the provisions of CPC only apply to commercial disputes that meet the Specified Value threshold as defined under Section 7 of the Act. (Paras 30)

(B) Interpretation of Statutes - Literal rule vs. purposive interpretation - The court emphasized that a literal interpretation must be followed when the language of the statute is clear, despite arguments for a purposive interpretation. (Paras 20, 28)

(C) Jurisdiction - Clarification regarding applicability of provisions - The court reaffirmed that the amendments to the CPC introduced by the Commercial Courts Act do not apply to commercial disputes below the Specified Value, which in this case was set at Rs.20,000. (Paras 30, 31)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought a review of a decision regarding the applicability of the amended provisions of the CPC propelled by the Commercial Courts Act, emphasizing that the amendments should only apply to disputes of a specified value of not less than Rs.3 lakhs, while the dispute in question was below this threshold.

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that the amendments of the CPC are not applicable in this case and ruled on the delay in filing the Written Statement.

Issues: The central issue was whether amendments to the CPC by the Commercial Courts Act apply to commercial disputes below the specified value.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the clear language of Section 16 necessitates a strict adherence to a literal interpretation, thereby excluding the applicability of the amended provisions of the CPC to disputes of value below the threshold.

Result: The review petition was upheld with the court verifying the applicability of the CPC amendments.

Table of Content
1. review petition for judgment interpretation (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. court's reasoning and legislative background (Para 6 , 8 , 9 , 12 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 24 , 28)
3. interpretation of legal provisions (Para 10 , 11 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
4. direct application of statutory provisions (Para 26 , 27 , 29)
5. decision on applicability of the cpc amendments (Para 30 , 31)
JUDGEMENT:

1. The present Review Petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking a review of the Judgment dated 27th February, 2019 passed by this Court in Axis Bank Limited vs. Mira Gehani & Ors, 2019 SCC Online Bom. 358 .

2. Subsequent to the Judgment being delivered, the Petitioner filed a Praecipe dated 7th March, 2019, which read as under :

"1. By an order dated 20th August, 2018, this Hon'ble Court framed the following question of law :

"Whether in view of the amendment to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 by a Commercial Court, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Court's Act, 2015 (4 of 2016), the Defendant can be allowed to file the Written Statement after 120 days from the date of service of Writ of Summons in a Commercial Suit".

2. Pursuant to the above mentioned Order, this Hon'ble Court was pleased to decide the above issue by an Order dated 27th February, 2019.

3. In this regard, the Defendant seeks to approach this Hon'ble Court for speaking to the minutes to the said Order dated 27th February, 2019 to the extent that contention of the Defendant with respect to the provisions of the CPC, 1908 as amended by the Commercial Courts Act not being applicable to a commercial dispute below a stipulated specified value is left open."

3. On the Praecipe, the following order came to be passed by this Court on 8th March, 2019 :

“XXX

2. Though the contention of the Defendant finds place in Clause 5.25 to 5.32 of the Written submissions, no arguments were advanced qua the same. The learned Advocate appearing for the Defendant states that he had made oral submissions towards the end. My notings speak otherwise. In view thereof, the question of speaking to the Minutes as sought does not arise. However, the Defendant may move an Application seeking Review."

4. The present Review Petition has therefore been filed pursuant to the liberty granted by this Court in the above order. According to the Petitioner, in the Judgment, this Court did not decide a limited contention of the Petitioner viz. that the amendments introduced to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (“Commercial Courts Act”) are only applicable to a Commercial Dispute of a Specified Value and not commercial disputes not of a Specified Value. Section 2 (i) of the Commercial Courts Act prescribes that the Specified Value in respect of a commercial dispute shall not be less than Rupees Three Lacs.

5. In the present Suit, the Plaintiff has determined the Specified Value of its suit at Rupees Twenty Thousand i.e. below the Specified Value as prescribed under the Commercial Courts Act.

6. In view of the above, the question of law being decided by this Order is whether the amendments introduced to the CPC by the Commercial Courts Act apply to Commercial Disputes not of a Specified Value but nonetheless heard by a Commercial Division in view of the proviso to Section 7 of the Commercial Courts Act ?

7. It is clarified that the present Order is restricted to only answering the question of law recorded in paragraph 6 above and disposal of Notice of Motion (L) No.2118 of 2018. Necessary orders will therefore have to be passed on the other applications seeking condonation of delay at the time of hearing of each of such application on its own merits.

8. For adjudication of the question of law as above, it would be necessary to briefly set-out the legislative background leading to the enactment of the Commercial Courts Act as also certain relevant provisions thereof :

8.1. The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate D

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top