Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Frankfinn Aviation Services (Pvt.) Ltd vs Fly- Hi Maritime Travels Private ... on 21 August, 2025

Author: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

Bench: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

                          $~25
                          *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +         CS(COMM) 83/2024 & I.A. 2119/2024 I.A. 9283/2024 I.A.
                                    3000/2025

                                    FRANKFINN AVIATION SERVICES (PVT.) LTD.      .....Plaintiff
                                                 Through: Mr. Kapil Midha, Mr. Garv Singh,
                                                          Ms. Muskan Garg, Advs.
                                                 versus

                                    FLY- HI MARITIME TRAVELS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.
                                                                              .....Defendants
                                                  Through: Mr. Sanjeev Anand, Sr. Advocate,
                                                           Ms. Madhumita Singh, Mr. Sameer
                                                           Sood, and Mr. Jatin Mandovaria,
                                                           Advs.

                          CORAM:
                          HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
                                            ORDER

% 21.08.2025 I.A. 3000/2025 (Application under Order VII R 14 CPC)

1. The present application is filed by the Defendants under Order VII Rule 14 (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC') seeking to place on record additional documents, which are enlisted at paragraph '1' and the same reads as under: -

a. The copies of invoices raised by M/S Fly Hi Travels for the period April 2009 to August 2021 and by M/S Fly Hi Maritimes Travels Pvt. Ltd. for the period January 2022 to April 2024 towards air ticketing and shipping related services provided to B2B Clients (Ship Owners) and Individuals (B2C).

b. The copies of agreements dated 04.04.2023 & 23.08.2023 signed between M/S Fly Hi Maritimes Travels Pvt. Ltd. and their Clients in the Shipping Industry.

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 22:58:43 c. A copy of CA certificate dated: 27.01.2025 confirming the Revenue (Gross & Net), Business Promotion Expenses and Export Turnover (in USD) of Defendant No.1 for FY 2021-22 (Sep 2021 - March 2022) till FY 2023-24 (April 2023 - March 2024)

2. Learned Senior counsel for the Applicants/Defendants states that the invoices and agreements sought to be placed on record are in support of the averments made at paragraph '3' of the preliminary submission enlisted in written statement.

2.1. He states that the documents could not be filed at the stage of the filing of the written statement due to lack of proper communication between the Defendants and their counsel.

3. In reply, learned counsel for the Plaintiff states that while the Plaintiff has no objection to the document enlisted at Sr. No (c) being taken on record without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Plaintiff. He states that the invoices enlisted at Sr. No (a) do not pertain to the impugned mark. He also submits that the agreements referred to at Sr. No (b) do not find any mention in the written statement.

3.1. He states that the plea raised in the captioned application with respect to lack of proper communication between the counsel and the Defendants does not give a good ground to the Defendants to seek to place on record these documents.

3.2. He states that the Plaintiff in his replication has seriously contested the submission of the Defendants with respect to their prior agreements with M/s Fly Hi Travels.

3.3. He states that in case this application is allowed, the Plaintiff be granted liberty to file additional documents to rebut these documents.

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 22:58:43

4. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. At the outset, it may be noted that the application of the Defendants ought not to have been filed under Order VII Rule 14 (3) CPC as the application is being filed in a commercial suit. Though the said application filed under Order VII Rule 14 (3) can be treated as one filed under Order VIII Rule 1-A (3) of the CPC as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 in view of the findings of the Supreme Court in the case of Sudhir Kumar alias S. Baliyan v. Vinay Kumar G.B1.

6. It would be relevant to refer to the provision of Order VIII Rule 1-A (3), which reads as under:

"1-A. Duty of defendant to produce documents upon which relief is claimed or relied upon by him.

.....

(3) A document which ought to be produced in court by the defendant under this Rule, but, is not so produced shall not, without the leave of the court, be received in evidence on his behalf at the hearing of the suit."

(Emphasis supplied)

7. Considering the facts of the present case concerned with the captioned application it would be apposite to refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sugandhi v. P. Rajkumar2, the relevant paragraph of the said judgment reads as under:

"8. Sub-rule (3), as quoted above, provides a second opportunity to the defendant to produce the documents which ought to have been produced in the court along with the written statement, with the leave of the court. The discretion conferred upon the court to grant such leave is to be exercised judiciously. While there is no straitjacket 1 2021 SCC OnLine SC 734.

(2020) 10 SCC 706.

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 22:58:43 formula, this leave can be granted by the court on a good cause being shown by the defendant.

9. It is often said that procedure is the handmaid of justice. Procedural and technical hurdles shall not be allowed to come in the way of the court while doing substantial justice. If the procedural violation does not seriously cause prejudice to the adversary party, courts must lean towards doing substantial justice rather than relying upon procedural and technical violation. We should not forget the fact that litigation is nothing but a journey towards truth which is the foundation of justice and the court is required to take appropriate steps to thrash out the underlying truth in every dispute. Therefore, the court should take a lenient view when an application is made for production of the documents under sub- rule (3)."

(Emphasis supplied)

8. In view of the settled law as discussed above, this Court is of the opinion that, considering that the suit is still at a pre-trial stage, the averments made at paragraph '3' of the written statement, the documents at Sr. Nos. (a) and (b), can be taken on record and the relevance or otherwise of these documents have to be proved by the Defendants in accordance with law.

9. With respect to the documents at Sr. No. (c), the counsel for the Plaintiff had submitted that the Plaintiff has no objection on the documents at Sr. No. (c) from being taken on record.

10. The additional documents sought to be placed on record through the captioned application are directed to be taken on record without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Plaintiff.

11. The Plaintiff shall file its affidavit of admission/denial of these additional documents within four (4) weeks.

12. The Plaintiff will be at liberty to file additional documents within four (4) weeks, for rebutting the documents (of the defendants) taken on record.

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 22:58:43

13. With the aforesaid directions, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 2119/2024 (Application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC)

14. Parties are directed to file their written note not exceeding three (3) pages, one (1) week prior to the next date of hearing.

15. List for hearing and disposal of I.A. 2119/2024 on 15.09.2025.

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J AUGUST 21, 2025 gm CS(COMM) 83/2024 Page 5 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 22:58:43