Gujarat High Court
M/S Jay Jalaram Textiles vs Gujarat State Electricity Corporation on 22 July, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1736/2024 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1736 of 2024
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ORDERS) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1736 of 2024
==========================================================
M/S JAY JALARAM TEXTILES & ANR.
Versus
GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RAVI N MANDALIYA(10327) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
MR VIRAL J DAVE(5751) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
Date : 22/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. In the present petition filed on 30.01.2024, the challenge is to the order dated 25.10.2023, passed in Exh. 1, namely an application under Order IX Rule 3 & 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (CPC), for restoration of the suit which has been dismissed for default. The order impugned records that the suit was at the stage of leading evidence of both the parties and while condoning the delay of 26 days in filing the restoration application, the Special Civil Suit No.117 of 2013 has been restored to its original number while allowing the restoration application.
Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 26 00:09:46 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1736/2024 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined
2. It is submitted by Mr.Viral J.Dave, learned advocate appearing for respondent-corporation that the suit is at the stage of plaintiff's evidence.
3. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record, we may note that the order of dismissal of suit dated 20.02.2018 at Page No.'29' of the paper-book categorically records that the suit was dismissed for default in the absence of both the parties, meaning thereby, the defendant namely the petitioner herein did not appear in the suit on the date when it was dismissed in default.
4. The impugned order dated 25.10.2023 further records that in spite of service of summons, the defendant had neither appeared before the court not submitted written statement and hence, on 02.02.2016, the order was passed to proceed ex-parte and matter was kept for framing the issues. In the meantime, on account of establishment of the Commercial Courts under the provisions of the Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Divisions of the High Court's Act, 2015, the suit was required to be transferred to the Commercial Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 26 00:09:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1736/2024 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined Court at Vadodara. It is further recorded in the order impugned that no notice was served to the learned advocates appearing for the parties as is apparent from the certified copies obtained from the Rojkam and as stated by the learned advocate of the plaintiff, when he inquired, it was intimated that the suit was on potala issues and not transferred to the Commercial Court till date. He then came to know that the suit was dismissed for default by the Presiding Officer of the Court namely 5th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara on 20.02.2018.
5. The arguments of the learned advocate for the plaintiff that all Civil Suits valued above Rs.1.00 Crore were liable to be transferred to the Commercial Court and hence, the present suit could not have been dismissed for default without transferring it to the Commercial Court, has then been noted. The contention of the learned advocate for the plaintiff that he came to know on 08.10.2021 that the suit has not been transferred and had been dismissed in default, when he applied for the certified copy and, thereafter, received the same on 01.11.2021 was considered by the Court, while allowing the restoration application. Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 26 00:09:46 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1736/2024 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined
6. For the fact recorded by the Court concerned for restoration of the suit vide order dated 25.10.2023 while recalling the order dated 20.02.2018 noticing that the suit could not have been proceeded with in the Court of the 5 th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara, after the establishment of the Commercial Court at Vadodara, cannot be said to suffer from any error of law, much less manifest error as sought to be pleaded before us. Moreover, taking note of the provisions of Order IX Rule 3 and 4, suffice it to note that a suit which has been dismissed in the absence of both the parties, may be restored on sufficient cause being shown for non-appearance by the plaintiff in view of Order IX Rule 4 CPC.
7. Taking note of the above, we do not find it a fit case for invoking our extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to attach any illegality to the impugned order dated 25.10.2013 of restoration of the suit. As per own case of the petitioner herein, the suit has now been transferred and the petitioner-defendant has also put in appearance before the Commercial Court. The suit is at the stage of evidence. The Commercial Court is directed to Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 26 00:09:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1736/2024 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2025 undefined proceed with the matter strictly in accordance with law and make an endevour to decide the suit as expeditiously as possible.
With the above, the present petition stands dismissed.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ ) (D.N.RAY,J) BINA SHAH Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Jul 25 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 26 00:09:46 IST 2025