Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Bank of Baroda, was the defendant in a commercial suit filed by the respondent, Gujarat Cables and Enamelled Products Pvt. Ltd., for recovery of Rs.83,66,242/- with interest. The suit was instituted on 14th November 2019. The defendant filed its written statement on 13th February 2020 along with three documents: a risk-based internal audit report, a statement of account, and a letter dated 23rd February 2021. Subsequently, the defendant sought leave to rely on additional documents, which the trial court refused by order dated 13th July 2022. The defendant challenged this order under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The High Court considered the provisions of Order VIII Rule 1A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and Section 16 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The Court noted that the trial court had not given any reasons for refusing the leave and that the documents were relevant to the defence. The Court held that the trial court ought to have exercised its discretion liberally, especially since the plaintiff could be compensated by costs. The impugned order was set aside, and the defendant was permitted to file additional documents subject to payment of costs of Rs.25,000/- to the plaintiff. The petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Commercial Suit - Additional Documents - Order VIII Rule 1A CPC - Section 16 Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - The defendant sought leave to file additional documents after filing written statement, which was refused by the trial court. The High Court held that the trial court ought to have exercised discretion liberally, especially when the documents were relevant and the plaintiff could be compensated by costs. The impugned order was set aside and the defendant was permitted to file additional documents subject to costs of Rs.25,000/-. (Paras 5-11) B) Civil Procedure - Commercial Suit - Prejudice - Costs - The Court observed that refusal to allow additional documents would cause irreparable prejudice to the defendant, whereas the plaintiff could be compensated by costs. The Court emphasized that procedural rules should not be applied mechanically to defeat the ends of justice. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in refusing leave to the defendant-bank to rely on additional documents which were not filed along with the written statement, in a commercial suit.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 13th July 2022 is set aside. The defendant is permitted to file additional documents subject to payment of costs of Rs.25,000/- to the plaintiff. The petition is allowed.
Law Points
- Order VIII Rule 1A CPC
- Section 16 of Commercial Courts Act
- 2015
- procedural flexibility
- additional documents
- prejudice
- costs
