Case Note & Summary
The Appellant, Resilient Innovations Private Limited, filed an appeal under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, challenging an order of the Learned Single Judge dated 22 October 2021. By that order, the Respondent, PhonePe Private Limited, was granted leave to withdraw its Commercial IP Suit (L) No. 24136 of 2021 with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action under Order 23 Rule 1(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Appellant contended that no ground for granting such liberty was made out and that the order suffered from jurisdictional error. The Respondent raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the appeal, arguing that the impugned order was not a 'judgment' under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The Court addressed the maintainability issue first. It analyzed the definition of 'judgment' under the Letters Patent and Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and held that an order granting leave to withdraw a suit with liberty to file a fresh suit does not finally determine the rights of the parties and is therefore not a 'judgment'. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable. The Court did not delve into the merits of the order under Order 23 Rule 1(3) CPC.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Withdrawal of Suit - Order 23 Rule 1(3) CPC - Liberty to File Fresh Suit - The Court examined whether the Single Judge's order granting leave to withdraw with liberty to file a fresh suit satisfied the requirements of Order 23 Rule 1(3) CPC. The Appellant contended that no formal defect or sufficient ground was made out. However, the Court did not decide this issue on merits as the appeal was held not maintainable. (Paras 1-3)
B) Commercial Law - Appeal - Maintainability - Section 13 Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Definition of 'Judgment' - The Court held that an order granting leave to withdraw a suit with liberty to file a fresh suit is not a 'judgment' under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, as it does not finally determine the rights of the parties. The appeal was dismissed as not maintainable. (Paras 4, 7-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an order granting leave to withdraw a suit with liberty to file a fresh suit under Order 23 Rule 1(3) CPC is a 'judgment' within the meaning of Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and therefore appealable.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. The Court held that an order granting leave to withdraw a suit with liberty to file a fresh suit under Order 23 Rule 1(3) CPC is not a 'judgment' within the meaning of Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and therefore no appeal lies.
Law Points
- Maintainability of appeal under Section 13 of Commercial Courts Act
- 2015
- Order 23 Rule 1(3) CPC
- Definition of 'judgment' under Letters Patent
- Commercial Appellate Division jurisdiction
Case Details
2022 LawText (BOM) (03) 22
COMM. APPEAL (L) NO. 24917 OF 2021
S.J. Kathawalla, Milind N. Jadhav
Mr. D.J. Khambatta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sharan Jagtiani, Senior Advocate with Mr. Nishad Nadkarni, Mr. Mohit Goel, Mr. Siddhant Goel, Mr. Asif Navodia, Ms. Khushboo Jhunjhunwala, Mr. Deepankar Mishra, Mr. Aditya Goel, Mr. Abhishek Kotnawal i/by Khaitan and Co., for Appellant. Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Advocate with Mr. Venkatesh Dhond, Senior Advocate with Mr. Hiren Kamod, Mr. Manish Jha, Mr. Hormuz Mehta, Ms. Anjali Anchayil, Mr. Yohaann Limathwala, Mr. Ahsan Allana i/by J. Sagar Associate, for Respondent.
Resilient Innovations Private Limited
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Commercial appeal against an order granting leave to withdraw a suit with liberty to file a fresh suit under Order 23 Rule 1(3) CPC.
Remedy Sought
The Appellant sought to challenge the order of the Learned Single Judge granting liberty to the Respondent to withdraw its suit and file a fresh suit on the same cause of action.
Filing Reason
The Appellant contended that the Learned Single Judge erred in granting such liberty without the requirements of Order 23 Rule 1(3) being satisfied.
Previous Decisions
The Learned Single Judge passed an order on 22 October 2021 granting the Respondent leave to withdraw its suit with liberty to file a fresh suit.
Issues
Whether the appeal under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is maintainable against an order granting leave to withdraw a suit with liberty to file a fresh suit under Order 23 Rule 1(3) CPC.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the impugned order is a 'judgment' under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and therefore appealable.
Respondent argued that the order is not a 'judgment' as it does not finally determine the rights of the parties, and thus the appeal is not maintainable.
Ratio Decidendi
An order granting leave to withdraw a suit with liberty to file a fresh suit under Order 23 Rule 1(3) CPC does not finally determine the rights of the parties and is not a 'judgment' under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Hence, such an order is not appealable under that provision.
Judgment Excerpts
This Appeal, filed under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 challenges an Order of the Learned Single Judge dated 22nd October 2021. By that Order, the Respondent was given leave to withdraw its suit with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action.
However, since our jurisdiction to decide the Appeal depends upon it being maintainable, we have addressed that issue first in our discussions and findings below.
Procedural History
The Respondent filed Commercial IP Suit (L) No. 24136 of 2021 on 20 October 2021. The Respondent filed Interim Application (L) No. 24138 of 2021. The Learned Single Judge passed an order on 22 October 2021 granting leave to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit. The Appellant filed the present appeal on 29 November 2021. The appeal was reserved on 2 December 2021 and pronounced on 11 March 2022.
Acts & Sections
- Commercial Courts Act, 2015: Section 13
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 23 Rule 1(3)
