Application for Additional Written Statement in Commercial Suit Dismissed; Court Emphasizes Strict Adherence to Commercial Courts Act Timelines
In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court upheld a decision by the Principal Commercial Court at Egmore, Chennai, dismissing an application by Sri Gokulam Hospital Pvt. Ltd. to file an additional written statement in a commercial suit against M/s. Canadian Crystalline Water India Limited. The High Court emphasized the strict procedural timelines set by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, which aim for the speedy resolution of commercial disputes.
The petitioner, Sri Gokulam Hospital Pvt. Ltd., sought to introduce a plea of forgery regarding documents submitted by the respondent after the original written statement was filed. The application was dismissed by the Commercial Court on the grounds that it would cause unnecessary delay and that the disputed documents had been available for inspection since the suit's inception.
Justice Abdul Quddhose, presiding over the case, noted that the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, provides specific procedural safeguards and strict timelines for filing written statements, which are integral to ensuring the swift adjudication of commercial disputes. Under this Act, the maximum time allowed for filing a written statement is 120 days from the receipt of the suit summons, and this timeline cannot be extended.
The High Court highlighted that while Order VIII Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) allows for subsequent pleadings in regular civil suits, it is not applicable to commercial suits due to the overriding provisions of the Commercial Courts Act. The Act's provisions take precedence over any inconsistent laws, including the CPC, underscoring the objective of expedited dispute resolution in commercial matters.
Despite the dismissal of the application, the court acknowledged the inherent powers of the Commercial Court under Section 151 CPC to direct additional written statements in specific exigencies, such as in response to amended plaints or substitution of legal heirs. However, such powers are to be exercised cautiously to prevent abuse of process and ensure justice.
The ruling serves as a reminder of the stringent procedural framework governing commercial litigation in India and reinforces the judiciary's commitment to minimizing delays in the resolution of commercial disputes.
Bottom line:-
Under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Order VIII Rule 9 CPC does not apply to Commercial suits. The Commercial Court, however, retains inherent powers under Section 151 CPC to direct the filing of additional written statements under specific exigencies in the interest of justice.
Statutory provision(s): Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Section 8, Section 21, Section 151 CPC, Order VIII Rule 9 CPC, Order XI CPC, Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
