Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Telecommunications Consultants India ... vs Rajendra Singh Kiledar Construction ... on 14 December, 2022

Author: Sujoy Paul

Bench: Sujoy Paul

                                                               1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                        MP No. 6026 of 2022
                                (TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONSULTANTS INDIA LIMITED Vs RAJENDRA SINGH KILEDAR
                                              CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS)

                           Dated : 14-12-2022
                                 Shri Uttam Maheshwari - Advocate fore the petitioner.


                                 Heard.
                                 The petition is admitted for final hearing.
                                 Issue notices to the respondents on payment of PF within three days,

failing which this petition shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference to the Bench.

He is also heard on interim relief.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no.1/plaintiff filed a regular civil suit before the learned Additional District Judge, Bhaisadehi, District Betul, which was registered as Case No. RCS -B- 1/2019. The petitioner upon receiving notices entered appearance and raised an objection regarding maintainability of the matter before regular Civil Court and pursuant thereof the matter was transferred to the Commercial Court, Bhopal and was re-registered as Case No. Comms. No.06/2022.

It is submitted that learned Commercial Court has not fulfilled the requirement of Section 15 (4) of the Commercial Courts Act 2015. By placing reliance on the order sheets of the Commercial Court, Bhopal, Shri Maheshwari submits that after transfer of the civil suit, the Commercial Court was obliged to prescribe a new time line within which the parties were required to complete their part of formality. In absence thereof the judgement of Supreme Court on which heavy reliance is placed by the court below in the impugned order i.e. in Signature Not Verified Signed by: BASANT KUMAR SHRIVAS Signing time: 12/14/2022 4:35:34 PM 2 SCG Contracts India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. K.S. Chamankar Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. passed in Civil Appeal No.1638 of 2019 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.103/2019) cannot be pressed into service. The said matter before the Supreme Court was not arising out of any proceeding of Commercial Court. Indeed, it was arising out of a regular civil suit. The said judgment of Supreme Court was considered by Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati in Amoda Iron Steel Limited Vs. Sneha Anlytics and Scientifics passed in Civil Revision Petition No. 1261/2020. He placed reliance in Para - 58 of this judgment, which reads as under :-

5 8 . Proviso to Section 15(4) which provides for the discretion in the court to prescribe a new time period for filing of the written statement in our view is in the nature of a specific provision for the suits and applications transferred to the commercial court under Section 15(2).

The general provision is Order VIII rule 1 CPC as amended through Section 16 of Act, 2015, which provides 1 2 0 days for filing written statement from the date of service o f summons. Applying the principle that the general excludes the specific even in the cases of conflict within the same enactment, the time line of 120 days for filing written statement under Order V, rule 1, sub rule(1) proviso and Order VIII rule 1 proviso shall not apply to the suits and application transferred to the commercial court under Section 15(2) and with respect to those suits and applications a new time line may be prescribed by the court in exercise of power under Section 15(4), proviso. Within such new time line the written statement shall be filed by the defendant.

In the light of aforesaid, he submits that the Court below has erred in declining the prayer to take W.S. on record.

Considering the aforesaid and subject to hearing the other side, till next date of hearing further proceeding of Comms. No.06/2022 shall remain stayed.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: BASANT KUMAR SHRIVAS Signing time: 12/14/2022 4:35:34 PM 3

Notices be made returnable in the week commencing 16th of January 2023.

Certified copy today.

                              (SUJOY PAUL)                            (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
                                 JUDGE                                         JUDGE
                           bks




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BASANT KUMAR
SHRIVAS
Signing time: 12/14/2022
4:35:34 PM