Bombay High Court Considers Interim Application for Judgment on Admissions in Admiralty Suit. Plaintiff Seeks Relief Under Order XII Rule 6 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Alleging Admissions by Defendants.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The present matter concerns an interim application filed by the plaintiff, Raj Transport and Trading Company, in the pending Admiralty Suit No. 17 of 2015 before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay exercising admiralty and vice admiralty jurisdiction. The suit involved the plaintiff and two defendants, namely Barge Madhwa (Defendant No. 1) and another entity (Defendant No. 2), whose liquidator was represented by counsel. The interim application, numbered IAL 4027 of 2025, was moved under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which enables a party to seek judgment on admissions made in pleadings or otherwise. On 4 April 2025, when the matter was called out before Justice Abhay Ahuja, the plaintiff's counsel, Mr. Dhruva Gandhi, informed the court that an affidavit in reply on behalf of Defendant No. 2 had been filed on 25 March 2025. No further submissions, arguments, or orders were recorded. The court merely noted the filing of the reply affidavit. No decision on the interim application was rendered. The judgment does not contain any discussion of the factual matrix, legal issues, or reasons; it is limited to a procedural notation. Consequently, the substantive outcome of the application remains pending.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Judgment on Admissions - Order XII Rule 6, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Plaintiff filed interim application seeking judgment on admissions - Defendant No. 2 filed an affidavit in reply dated 25th March, 2025 - Court took note of the filing (Paras 1-3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the plaintiff is entitled to judgment on admissions under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (BOM) (04) 96

Interim Application (L) No. 4027 of 2025 in Admiralty Suit No. 17 of 2015, and Admiralty Suit No. 17 of 2015

2025-04-04

Abhay Ahuja, J.

2025:BHC-OS:6532

Dhruva Gandhi, Naishad Bhatia, Heetkumar Vachhani (for Plaintiff), Madhur Zatakia, Raghav Chadha, Harsha Uppal, Akash Manwani (for Liquidator of Defendant No. 2)

Raj Transport and Trading Company

Barge Madhwa and another

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Admiralty suit seeking judgment on admissions under Order XII Rule 6 CPC.

Remedy Sought

Plaintiff seeks judgment on admissions against defendants.

Filing Reason

Alleged admissions in pleadings by defendants.

Issues

Whether plaintiff is entitled to judgment on admissions under Order XII Rule 6 CPC.

Judgment Excerpts

This Interim Application has been filed by the Applicant / Plaintiff under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Today when the matter is called out, Mr. Gandhi, learned Counsel appears for the Applicant and submits that affidavit in reply dated 25th March, 2025 has been filed by the Defendant No.2 to the said Interim Application.

Procedural History

Plaintiff filed Admiralty Suit No. 17 of 2015. Subsequently, Interim Application No. 4027 of 2025 was filed under Order XII Rule 6 CPC. Defendant No. 2 filed an affidavit in reply dated 25-03-2025.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order XII Rule 6
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Considers Interim Application for Judgment on Admissions in Admiralty Suit. Plaintiff Seeks Relief Under Order XII Rule 6 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Alleging Admissions by Defendants.
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal and Partly Allows Claimants' Appeal in Motor Accident Compensation Case — Negligence of Driver Proved, Compensation Enhanced for Loss of Dependency and Consortium. The court upheld the fi...